Acceptance Thread

[Platonist]

I think they would ask this even if departments didn't care at all. I suspect it's largely just something the graduate admissions people use to keep files straight, especially since the previously applied question was often next to questions about whether you had ever attended the school before. You don't want to have duplicate files/records/identifiers for the same person, because if your filing system goes by name, date of birth, social, etc. something could accidentally end up in the old file. From googling, it looks like for some schools you don't have to re-submit transcripts, GRE scores, etc. if you're reapplying. 

Yes, this makes good sense, Table. Thanks. I did not realize that they would keep your file for the whole year. I guess there may be thousands of applications for the graduate school each year. 

Edited February 12, 2014 by Platonist

[Table]

Okay, so I don't take climate seriously because I don't agree that every testimony is true by default? Wow. You also realize that both sides made a testimony, right? And that they differed?

 

It is very bad philosophy to assume that someone who disagrees with you because they don't care about the issue at hand. Example: I may think that evolution is true, but not accept by default every single piece of proposed evidence for the position just because it supports my position...

If you will never attend a school at which a negative testimony has been filed, substantiated or not, then you won't be attending graduate school at all.

I understand the problems, I take them very seriously, but the mere fact that an accusation has been made does not a bad person make.

 

Since you were a little touchy about downvotes earlier, I want to be clear: I downvoted this post because you do not seem to be listening to anything anyone is saying.  

 

No one is assuming all accusations are true. Aspasia made an important point:

However, *whether or not they are true* no one at Rutgers is in the position to be certain of their falsity. If the department is willing to place its students at risk in light of this news by hiring him on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, that indifference for equity and justice for its students is not characteristic of a department I would or could tolerate. 

 

University departments are not legal systems. They are not condemning a philosopher to jail when they refuse to hire them. Being hired is a privilege and not a right. Departments are justified in refusing to hire philosophers when doing so poses a risk to the standards of the department and the community members therein. If they don't take those risks seriously enough to avoid hiring someone who has been credibly accused of sexual assault, I don't want to be a member of that community. 

[SelfHatingPhilosopher]

You also realize that both sides made a testimony, right? And that they differed?

 

It doesn't seem right to weigh the two testimonies equally in this situation. You're mischaractizing the situation.

 

First of all, a charge of sexual assault is pretty substantial in and of itself. Yes, there have been cases of false accusations in the past, but by and large such charges tend to turn to be true. Thus, the simple fact a student has brought forwrard this charge should make departments wary of hiring such a person.

 

But the story doesn't end there. Let's look at the other facts. (2) The accuser tried to commit suicide. (3) The accuser was diagnoed with PTSD be a medical practioner. (4) An indepedent investigation found that wrongdoing had been committed. There's probably a lot of importants that need to be unpacked from (4), because I'm assuming the investigation just didn't hear the two different testimonies and release a judgment: "WE FLIPPED A COIN AND WENT WITH THEIR TESTIMONEY OVER THE OTHER." They did an investigation. They interviewed other students, other professors, and did other things.

 

So yeah. Innocent until proven guilty. But if I'm chair of a department, and some guy who wants to be responsible for the philosophical growth and education of my undergraduates comes in with a record like the above... I will not be at all comfortable.

 

If you will never attend a school at which a negative testimony has been filed, substantiated or not, then you won't be attending graduate school at all.

 

 

And yet, oddly enough, I went through two departments without any of my professors managing to draw up a sexual assault charge even though some of them have been teaching for decades...

[TheVineyard]

That point doesn't sound very convincing, Table, considering the point that I made at the end of my post: if you aren't willing to attend a school that has had an accusation made against its faculty, then you won't be attending graduate school at all.

Edited February 12, 2014 by TheVineyard

[PerpetualApplicant No More]

I found that many people applied more than one time. But my concern is: how much chance would one be accepted by a school this year if she was rejected in a previous year by the same school? When I applied, I saw that most of schools request you to answer if this is the first time that you have applied to them. Why this question? The assumption is that if you applied before but did not get in, they would not "waste too much time" on evaluating your application and likely issue a rejection again. If this were assumption were wrong, what sense would it make for them to request such an information? And if this were the case, I would be really worried about the prospects of reapplying and being admitted by the these schools to which I applied this year for the first time. I would have to reapply to the schools to which I did not apply for the first time. That is really disappointing. Experience or thoughts? 

 

I think it's helpful to distniguish two overlapping questions contained here: first, does reapplying hurt your application versus applying somewhere for the first time, and secnod, what is the function of the 'have you previously applied here?' question on applications.

 

To answer the latter question, I think Table is absolutely right.

 

To answer the former question, re-applying can hurt you if you do it wrong, but will not if you do it right. Doing it wrong involves submitting essentially the same application as last year: you submit the same writing sample, same letters, and, crucially, have taken no more classes. If you do this, then the adcom has, for all intents and purposes, already reviewed your application and reached a decision on it--the one they reached last year. Of course, the adcom makeup may change, the pool may be substantively weaker, but your chances of even being considered are contingent on such factors outside of your control, so I would just not do it.

 

On the other hand, it won't hurt you at all if you produce a substantively different application, where you have done more work, gotten (some) new letters, etc. At that point, you are, for all intents and purposes, a different applicant, one now defined in terms of your new file rather than your old.

[xypathos]

Asp isn't saying she refuses to attend a school with a negative reputation. She's saying she refuses to attend a school that would employ a professor who has a credible reputation/history of sexual assault. There's a difference.

 

Keep in mind that the school's investigation concluded he

 

 

“engaged in unwelcome and inappropriate sexual advances,”

 

A NU committee also came to the conclusion that Ludlow should be fired.

 

Now, as I personally learned from Boulder's situation - not all universities actually forbid sexual relationships between professors and students. Perhaps Ludlow's defense will be it was consensual or that nothing happened. Either way, the woman in question was violated (keep in mind - she gets to claim that) and two investigations (presuming the dean and the committee operated independently) found Ludlow at fault.

[TheVineyard]

Asp isn't saying she refuses to attend a school with a negative reputation. She's saying she refuses to attend a school that would employ a professor who has a credible reputation/history of sexual assault. There's a difference.

 

Keep in mind that the school's investigation concluded he

 

A NU committee also came to the conclusion that Ludlow should be fired.

 

Now, as I personally learned from Boulder's situation - not all universities actually forbid sexual relationships between professors and students. Perhaps Ludlow's defense will be it was consensual or that nothing happened. Either way, the woman in question was violated (keep in mind - she gets to claim that) and two investigations (presuming the dean and the committee operated independently) found Ludlow at fault.

Thank you. When I googled the issue, I found only the accusation, and that she is suing the university, demanding that it pay for her full tuition and pay for her emotional distress.

 

This article on it (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-northwestern-sex-lawsuit-met-20140212,0,7472417.story) suggested that Ludlow isn't even headed to Rutgers anyway (via Ludlow saying "it was posted on the Leiter Report so it must be true")...

Edited February 12, 2014 by TheVineyard

[humean_skeptic]

Peter Ludlow has taken over TGC Acceptance Thread. 

[TheVineyard]

Peter Ludlow has taken over TGC Acceptance Thread. 

 

The ugly ramifications of a slow Monday+Tuesday.

[humean_skeptic]

The ugly ramifications of a slow Monday+Tuesday.

 

Then what are the ramifications of a slow Monday through Sunday? 

[Table]

That point doesn't sound very convincing, Table, considering the point that I made at the end of my post: if you aren't willing to attend a school that has had an accusation made against its faculty, then you won't be attending graduate school at all.

 

First of all, sexual assault accusations against faculty are not as common as you seem to think. Additionally, as others have pointed out, this is not an unsubstantiated accusation. It was found credible and a committee concluded that he should be fired because of it. The issue is not settled: there is an ongoing lawsuit. Knowingly inviting someone into your department during something like this is much worse than having an accusation made against an existing faculty member. 

 

(I want to say, though, that I suspect Rutgers was not aware of the issue at the time. We'll have to wait and see how they respond. On the Leiter thing, though, I think Leiter is pretty conservative about posting that someone has accepted an offer and doesn't do it until it's confirmed by the department or individual.)

 

Okay, so I don't take climate seriously because I don't agree that every testimony is true by default? Wow. You also realize that both sides made a testimony, right? And that they differed?

Again, it is hardly two pieces of equal testimony here. But let's say you decided to give the student's accusation and Ludlow's denial equal weight here, so you think there's a 50% chance he sexually assaulted a student and a 50% chance he didn't. Should you invite him into your department? No. Taking a 50% chance of exposing your students to someone who sexually assaulted and possibly raped a student is a completely unacceptable risk. 

Edited February 12, 2014 by Table

[RookIV]

 Can we keep arguments out of this thread guys?

 

 

Also, responders to this thread may find David Mamet's play Oleanna worth a read. 

[Table]

Also, responders to this thread may find David Mamet's play Oleanna worth a read. 

 

Or not, because this isn't a ambiguous touch on the shoulder, it's professor getting an 18- or 19-year-old student drunk and into his bed. 

[Cottagecheeseman]

Waking up to this thread:

 

[SelfHatingPhilosopher]

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2014/02/12/campus/day-after-lawsuit-ludlows-role-at-northwestern-unclear-moving-forward/

 

Rutger's is examining the situation.

[kant_get_in]

Then what are the ramifications of a slow Monday through Sunday? 

 

We could post GIFs and cat memes. 

[kant_get_in]

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2014/02/12/campus/day-after-lawsuit-ludlows-role-at-northwestern-unclear-moving-forward/

 

Rutger's is examining the situation.

 

“This was not brought to our attention by either the candidate or his employer. We are looking into this matter thoroughly including requesting all relevant information to fully evaluate his candidacy.” -Rutgers Spokesperson

 

I find it hard to believe that Rutgers wasn't aware of the allegations presented to Ludlow in 2012 and Northwestern's Office of Sexual Harassment's findings. However, I find it just as hard to believe that Rutgers was aware of them while making the offer to Ludlow, especially with the growing concern over workplace climate.

 

I'll just do the Arcesilaus thing. When presented with equipollent reasons for and against some matter, just suspend belief. 

 

[philosophe]

Waking up to this thread:

 

 

My face precisely. 

 

I hope there's action today so we can get this thread back on track.

Edited February 12, 2014 by philosophe

[ianfaircloud]

Peter Ludlow has taken over TGC Acceptance Thread. 

 

I started a separate thread related to this, so I hope people will move this important conversation there.  It deserves a dedicated thread.

[Platonist]

Anyone who knows which PhD programs in philosophy besides Albany SUNY are still open for application? It seems that the application deadline of most of these programs has already expired. But are there any ones that accept application with financial aids? Thanks. 

Edited February 12, 2014 by Platonist

[ianfaircloud]

Anyone who knows which PhD programs in philosophy besides Albany SUNY are still open for application? It seems that the application deadline of most of these programs has already expired. But are there any ones that accept application with financial aids? Thanks. 

 

Saint Louis University.  Decent program.  Good for medieval or religion.  Near Washington University in St. Louis.

 

https://www.slu.edu/department-of-philosophy/graduate-program

 

February 15.

[wandajune]

Anyone who knows which PhD programs in philosophy besides Albany SUNY are still open for application? It seems that the application deadline of most of these programs has already expired. But are there any ones that accept application with financial aids? Thanks. 

 

Arizona State University just re-opened their PhD program, and I believe the deadline is Feb. 15th. They claim to have a lot of teaching assistantships available this year.

[GrammaticalFiction]

Congrats to the Miami Ohio acceptance!

[AcademicX]

More congrats to the Miami Ohio acceptance. It's an excellent MA program for Continental Philosophy. Does anyone know if Stony Brook will be releasing a waitlist?

[Hopephily]

So, given what is transpiring with Northwestern and Ludlow, I wonder what this could mean for those of us who got into Northwestern this year... especially given what happened with CU.