Rejections and Thinking about fit.

[Hopephily]

I know that we are all advised to apply broadly. So there are some applying to upwards of 25 programs (I've even heard of someone applying to 30). But from what I gather most of us are in the 12-20 range. I was one of the many that did not get into UNC. Thinking back, I was hesitant about applying there in the first place, given my interests and the those of the faculty. I'm sure I could have learned a great deal working there and would have found new interests that aligned well with the professors there, but it wouldn't have been one of my top picks at this juncture in my studies. Of course, there are a number of programs that I applied to which have this property. I must say, thinking about this makes me question (at least to some extent) the general advice to "cast a wide net" when applying (that is, of course, unless your interests fit a wide range of programs well). Given my particular interests, I think there are about 5 programs in total, for which I think I would be a good fit. Of course, applying to such a small number of programs sounds crazy to a lot of ears, but I can't shake the feeling that the vast majority of programs that I applied to would likely find me to be a square peg in their round slot. Maybe I'm exaggerating the importance of fit, but I'm inclined to think that when ad comms are combing through hundreds of qualified applicants, that fit would be a very important factor.  Any thoughts? 

[DHumeDominates]

I know that we are all advised to apply broadly. So there are some applying to upwards of 25 programs (I've even heard of someone applying to 30). But from what I gather most of us are in the 12-20 range. I was one of the many that did not get into UNC. Thinking back, I was hesitant about applying there in the first place, given my interests and the those of the faculty. I'm sure I could have learned a great deal working there and would have found new interests that aligned well with the professors there, but it wouldn't have been one of my top picks at this juncture in my studies. Of course, there are a number of programs that I applied to which have this property. I must say, thinking about this makes me question (at least to some extent) the general advice to "cast a wide net" when applying (that is, of course, unless your interests fit a wide range of programs well). Given my particular interests, I think there are about 5 programs in total, for which I think I would be a good fit. Of course, applying to such a small number of programs sounds crazy to a lot of ears, but I can't shake the feeling that the vast majority of programs that I applied to would likely find me to be a square peg in their round slot. Maybe I'm exaggerating the importance of fit, but I'm inclined to think that when ad comms are combing through hundreds of qualified applicants, that fit would be a very important factor.  Any thoughts? 

 

Like you, some of the programs to which I applied are not great fits for me and others, I think, are. But I don't regret applying to some of the "non-fit" programs, basically for the reason you yourself mention: one can acquire new interests and strengthen previously minor interests, especially when one is surrounded by excellent faculty and fellow grad students.

[Gnothi_Seauton]

I think that most of us have some "order of importance" list in our heads (writing sample, then letters, then GPA, then GRE and SOP) when we think about our prospects for admission.  As the admissions season progresses, I'm inclined to think, as you seem to, that fit is more important than most of us have thought.  Those who have listed their areas of interest in the forums and received acceptances have seemed so far to be really good fits for their potential departments.  My one acceptance is a great fit for my interests, though I've yet to hear word from a couple departments that have sent out acceptances and waitlists (so I'm inferring rejections).  I applied to one school (Duke) because of the presence of one particular person (Allen Buchanan), who is only at Duke half the year anyway.  He fits perfectly with my interests in political philosophy, but the department has limited options in my other areas of interest.  Admissions decisions, of course, are based on many factors, some of which are bound to be somewhat random and subjective, so I don't want to say anything like "if I'd been a better fit, then I would have gotten into X."  I wouldn't presume to say anything like that.  But it seems plausible that, given the evidence from the forums thus far this admissions season, fit is more important than we might otherwise suspect.  

[wandajune]

I thought a lot about fit when choosing schools to apply to, and thus far it's turned out pretty well in my favor. Not sure how much weight it had in the admissions decisions, but I imagine it probably helped. I didn't expect to get many (if any) acceptances, but right now I'm at 3a/0w/1r/12. I would say it's pretty important. 

Edited February 5, 2014 by wandajune

[DHumeDominates]

It's refreshing to hear some successful applicants echoing the refrain that fit matters. I'd imagine that if you've been admitted somewhere and you're an unkind person, you might have a twisted incentive to downplay the importance of fit in order to make unsuccessful applicants feel like their rejections are exclusively due to their own stupidity.

[Griswald]

One question that's relevant to this topic, I think, is how settled you are in your areas of interest. It's not uncommon for your interests to change during your graduate studies. If you think that you're not settled in your interests, casting a wide net might be advisable. Also relevant is how confident you are in your ability to judge fit. What if the adcom at a top-10 would have correctly judged you to be a good fit had you applied there, but you didn't apply because you misjudged how well you'd fit in there?

[Gnothi_Seauton]

DHumeDominates, I would hope that no admitted applicant would take that attitude.  Aside from being morally repugnant, it would seem to show a stunning lack of appreciation for how much of a role luck plays in any decision.  

[Table]

I must say, thinking about this makes me question (at least to some extent) the general advice to "cast a wide net" when applying (that is, of course, unless your interests fit a wide range of programs well). Given my particular interests, I think there are about 5 programs in total, for which I think I would be a good fit. Of course, applying to such a small number of programs sounds crazy to a lot of ears, but I can't shake the feeling that the vast majority of programs that I applied to would likely find me to be a square peg in their round slot. Maybe I'm exaggerating the importance of fit, but I'm inclined to think that when ad comms are combing through hundreds of qualified applicants, that fit would be a very important factor.  Any thoughts?

I suspect the kind of "fit" admissions committees are thinking about is somewhat harder to predict than we imagine. When I think about my "fit," I'm largely thinking about how many people are working in my areas of interest and how exciting their projects are to me. I suspect this does not totally match up with what adcoms are looking for, but I'm having trouble putting that thought into words.

If fit was somewhat hard for applicants to predict, though, that would be a reason for the "apply widely" advice, even if applicants rarely get into departments where the fit is not great.

Did anyone sometimes change their stated interests in their SOP to seem like a better fit? I'm curious.

[SelfHatingPhilosopher]

During my first round I only applied to 6 programs which I felt I had a good fit with. I received only one outright rejection from a PhD program, but 1 PhD acceptance, 1 PhD waitlist, and 3 MA acceptances. I like to think whatever "success" I had, had to do with a sane decision procedure on where to apply and a customized SoP to each place.

 

Of course, I have no evidence for this, so your mileage may (will) vary. In the fall I plan on applying to at least 20 programs as well because holy shit this process is irrational and terrifying.

[Loric]

So...

 

You're saying I was right...?

[Cottagecheeseman]

So...

 

You're saying I was right...?

 

No you were wrong about pretty much everything.

Edited February 5, 2014 by zizeksucks

[ta_pros_to_telos]

I think applicants' original assessment of fit may change, not to mention it may not always be the same as the admissions committees'. I've heard of others discovering through campus visits that schools they might have applied to but not considered the best fit for them at first turned out to be really good options for them. At the same time, I've also been told not to apply to schools I wouldn't be willing to attend. I chose not to apply to schools that seemed prestigious but which I strongly felt would not be a good fit for me. It sounds wise to cast a wide net, just not so wide that you're no longer actually excited about the schools to which you're applying. 

[MattDest]

I think applicants' original assessment of fit may change, not to mention it may not always be the same as the admissions committees'. I've heard of others discovering through campus visits that schools they might have applied to but not considered the best fit for them at first turned out to be really good options for them. At the same time, I've also been told not to apply to schools I wouldn't be willing to attend. I chose not to apply to schools that seemed prestigious but which I strongly felt would not be a good fit for me. It sounds wise to cast a wide net, just not so wide that you're no longer actually excited about the schools to which you're applying. 

 

This is how I felt, too. I applied to schools I would be willing to attend. Like others have already said, I think that applying too narrowly to schools you see as a *fit* might unnecessarily limit the room for you AOIs to grow, or for adcoms to interpret how you might fit into their department (especially if adcoms and applicants don't always see eye-to-eye on fit, which seems possible). There are plenty of other prudential reasons to apply narrowly, however, as many applicants can't afford to apply to broadly, wouldn't be interested in living in certain areas, etc. 

[maxhgns]

I applied to five schools. By my own assessment, I fit three of them like a glove, and the other two were poor fits (I thought of them as safeties even though they were high-ranked departments). I got into 3/5, and they were the glove's three fingers. I have no evidence to offer in favour of fit, but I also don't think it's an accident that I was accepted where I was accepted.

 

There's no doubt that interests change as one progresses through the PhD. I'd done an MA already, and was certain about my AoI--and it's still my AoS, although my surrounding interests have changed significantly (away from history and towards LEM). But I still fit into my department really well. I gladly took and happily audit a wide range of courses, can fill out pretty much any TA slot, and can just generally contribute to all sorts of aspects of departmental life. Our grad student body isn't particularly clique-y precisely because incoming students are chosen for their fit. And I'm really happy here. "Fit" seems to quantify over all those kinds of factors (plus over opportunities in cognate fields, certificates/options, and interdisciplinary awards), and my experience here leads me to believe that it really does make a huge difference to a department's quality of life, and a student body's cohesion. I know a few people who went to departments that were poor fits, and their experiences seem to have been pretty miserable. Whether that was due to fit or other issues, I can't say. But I do think fit had an important role to play.

 

So there you have it. It's not much, but it's my data point.

Edited February 6, 2014 by maxhgns

[Billy Goehring]

Only apply to programs you would want to attend. I know that sounds silly, and that a lot of applicants think, "Well, gee, I'd be happy to get into *any* program!" 

 

First: I think OP hit the nail on the head--if you have to imagine yourself changing yourself and your interests drastically to fit into a department ("I'm not really into Philosophy of Mind, but I could learn!"), try putting yourself in the adcom's shoes. Why would they ever admit you, when there are plenty of applicants who aren't barking up the wrong tree?

 

Second: Let's say you do get in. Consider your own sanity. I did not take this advice, and now I'm in a program that I'm struggling to adapt to. It's not a bad program--we have a good placement record and both students and faculty publish and conference regularly--but I find myself adjusting my interests to meet those of faculty members I have little in common with. 

 

Here's where I went wrong, and I hope people take this advice if they're deciding between acceptances or are planning on applying next year: look at the program's faculty, and pretend you're setting up your dissertation committee. Of course these things will change and your dissertation is still faint on the horizon, but put some thought into your committee before applying or accepting. If you can't form a dream team of professors whose work you aspire to emulate and whose shoulders you'd like to stand on--professors you're excited to work with--then strike that program off your list, no matter how highly Brian Leiter recommends it. 

[Hopephily]

Literally, moments after posting this thread, I got accepted to Northwestern--a program for which I would say I am a very good fit. Thanks for weighing in everyone. 

[ta_pros_to_telos]

Congratulations, Hopephily! 

[ianfaircloud]

Literally, moments after posting this thread, I got accepted to Northwestern--a program for which I would say I am a very good fit. Thanks for weighing in everyone. 

 

That's really great.  Good to hear.  Congratulations!

[Hopephily]

Thank you!

[objectivityofcontradiction]

I've seen acceptances go up to a few schools that were near the bottom of my list and I have not been one of them yet. These were places I applied to that I felt I fit well with, but not as well as say, my top 5, which have yet to release any results. So I suppose I have to think that fit does matter a lot, though I knew this already and mentioned it a while back on here, at which point there were several that disagreed. But it has always been obvious to me that fit, along with the makeup of the adcom, are the real difference makers. 

Edited February 7, 2014 by objectivityofcontradiction

[philstudent1991]

I feel like my whole perspective on this process has changed in the last two weeks. I used to think I'd have an offer or two. Now I'm certain that I won't get in anywhere and will be lucky to be taken by an MA, which is strange since all that has happened was a rejection from UNC, which I have always known was inevitable. Surely that's the essence of the human experience...being a rational being tortured by irrational emotions in an irrational world.

[DHumeDominates]

I feel like my whole perspective on this process has changed in the last two weeks. I used to think I'd have an offer or two. Now I'm certain that I won't get in anywhere and will be lucky to be taken by an MA, which is strange since all that has happened was a rejection from UNC, which I have always known was inevitable. Surely that's the essence of the human experience...being a rational being tortured by irrational emotions in an irrational world.

 

I'm experiencing the same paralyzing self-doubt for the same reason: a UNC rejection. Only in my case, I didn't apply to any MAs. Whoops. Guess I'll just have to reapply next year. Fml.

Edited February 7, 2014 by DHumeDominates

[DHumeDominates]

Only apply to programs you would want to attend. I know that sounds silly, and that a lot of applicants think, "Well, gee, I'd be happy to get into *any* program!" 

 

First: I think OP hit the nail on the head--if you have to imagine yourself changing yourself and your interests drastically to fit into a department ("I'm not really into Philosophy of Mind, but I could learn!"), try putting yourself in the adcom's shoes. Why would they ever admit you, when there are plenty of applicants who aren't barking up the wrong tree?

 

Second: Let's say you do get in. Consider your own sanity. I did not take this advice, and now I'm in a program that I'm struggling to adapt to. It's not a bad program--we have a good placement record and both students and faculty publish and conference regularly--but I find myself adjusting my interests to meet those of faculty members I have little in common with. 

 

Here's where I went wrong, and I hope people take this advice if they're deciding between acceptances or are planning on applying next year: look at the program's faculty, and pretend you're setting up your dissertation committee. Of course these things will change and your dissertation is still faint on the horizon, but put some thought into your committee before applying or accepting. If you can't form a dream team of professors whose work you aspire to emulate and whose shoulders you'd like to stand on--professors you're excited to work with--then strike that program off your list, no matter how highly Brian Leiter recommends it. 

 

I'm surprised you were courageous enough to state this publicly, without anonymity. Kudos to you.

[MattDest]

I'm experiencing the same paralyzing self-doubt for the same reason: a UNC rejection. Only in my case, I didn't apply to any MAs. Whoops. Guess I'll just have to reapply next year. Fml.

 

Is there still time to apply to MAs? You might be able to. 

[Griswald]

Is there still time to apply to MAs? You might be able to. 

I'm fairly confident that some of the top MA programs accept applications on a rolling basis. The thing is, you are probably less likely to get funding the longer you wait to apply. Still worth looking into, though.