Rejection thread

[Silly_Socrates]

Mine says the exact same thing, and it should also be noted that my last name begins very early on in the alphabet. It's also been updated on the website for me.

I told myself that my early-in-the-alphabet last name was the reason I was the first person to report a rejection from Bloomington, and it was not because my application was so bad that they just had to reject me ASAP. 

[Golem]

I told myself that my early-in-the-alphabet last name was the reason I was the first person to report a rejection from Bloomington, and it was not because my application was so bad that they just had to reject me ASAP. 

 

Would you mind saying the first letter of your last name? Mine is fairly early too and I'm trying to see if it might be a good sign for me.

[humean_skeptic]

Would you mind saying the first letter of your last name? Mine is fairly early too and I'm trying to see if it might be a good sign for me.

 

My last name starts with a 'C' and I've not yet heard from Arizona. But I'm pretty sure -- and by 'pretty' I mean 100% -- that everyone who applied to Arizona and who hasn't been wait listed or accepted by Arizona is going to get a rejection from them. Sad face. 

[Silly_Socrates]

Would you mind saying the first letter of your last name? Mine is fairly early too and I'm trying to see if it might be a good sign for me.

I'm an A, so as early as it gets!

Edited February 18, 2014 by Silly_Socrates

[philosophe]

I still don't understand why they wouldn't do a mass email... or a check the website email. Seems tedious and time consuming to write a personal rejection email.

Edited February 18, 2014 by philosophe

[logos0516]

Can anybody confirm rejections from University of Arizona? What did the letter say?

[logos0516]

It's so depressing. I haven't heard any good news. I applied to 14 schools. I have heard one rejection, and I think another 3-4 are immediately on the way. I don't know what I will do with myself if I don't get it. I applied 2x already in the past and got rejected from every school. I have a Master's at CUNY, where I have a 3.83. I have a great writing sample. Doesn't that mean ANYTHING? 

[Platonist]

 

Okay, I'm writing this in bold, italicized, red font to draw your attention:

 

Can anyone confirm receipt of a wait-list notification from

• Wisconsin Madison?
• Indiana Bloomington (Philosophy PhD only)?

 

 

Ian:

Wisconsin has not sent out wailtlist yet. Virginia and Rochester have not either. But the wailtists from the three are expected to go out relatively soon. 

Edited February 18, 2014 by Platonist

[Table]

For some reason I'm feeling so impatient to receive a rejection letter from Arizona. I have no idea why. 

[PerpetualApplicant No More]

It's so depressing. I haven't heard any good news. I applied to 14 schools. I have heard one rejection, and I think another 3-4 are immediately on the way. I don't know what I will do with myself if I don't get it. I applied 2x already in the past and got rejected from every school. I have a Master's at CUNY, where I have a 3.83. I have a great writing sample. Doesn't that mean ANYTHING? 

Sure it does. But there is more to it than that: you have to apply to the right program, at the right time (i.e. when they're looking for a student who has your interests). One thing you can do is try to find out how your letters were received, and, if they were not all stellar, get a new one or two (rule of thumb: do not get a letter from anyone who has ever given you less than a full A).

 

That said, sometimes it just takes time. I am in my fifth round, and I finally got an offer.

[logos0516]

Sure it does. But there is more to it than that: you have to apply to the right program, at the right time (i.e. when they're looking for a student who has your interests). One thing you can do is try to find out how your letters were received, and, if they were not all stellar, get a new one or two (rule of thumb: do not get a letter from anyone who has ever given you less than a full A).

 

That said, sometimes it just takes time. I am in my fifth round, and I finally got an offer.

....If one of my letters was "less than stellar," then I am going to file a report alleging professional misconduct and unethical behavior by that professor.

[logos0516]

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE should a recommender EVER agree to write a rec if they cannot say positive things about that applicant that would reflect favorably on them and increase their chances of admission. To do ANYTHING BUT THAT is misconduct of an egregious form. ESPECIALLY when I told the professors not to write letters for me if they couldn't say positive things about me and my ability. ESPECIALLY then. 

[PerpetualApplicant No More]

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE should a recommender EVER agree to write a rec if they cannot say positive things about that applicant that would reflect favorably on them and increase their chances of admission. To do ANYTHING BUT THAT is misconduct of an egregious form. ESPECIALLY when I told the professors not to write letters for me if they couldn't say positive things about me and my ability. ESPECIALLY then. 

A few points:

 

1) There is a distinction between what a letter-writer thinks is a (sufficiently) positive letter and what is, and the two are not always co-extensive. A professor may think that what he or she is saying is great, but it may not look like other great letters. From what I understand anecdotally, this is especially common in 'across-the-pond' applications, as British letter writers are positive but honest, whereas American letter writers are (and hence American adcoms expect letters that are) positive and hyperbolic. Even if it's not true about British and Americans generally, it's possible in particular situations. So, if at all possible it's worth checking *how your letters were received* independent of how your letter writers intended them to be (I don't know if they still do this, but UC Davis used to send rejections with a form that told you what was wrong, that's how I found this out once). As a caveat, I add 'if at all possible' because admissions processes are putatively confidential. But if you are at CUNY, you can always ask a prof who knows someone at that school and see what happens--worst case, they say they can't do it.

 

2) Not all profs agree with you. All agree that writing a terrible letter is unethical, but some think that writing a decent, but unexceptional letter is not (i.e. 'this student is well suited to ranked programs in the bottom half' is technically not terrible--it's not 'the candidate has fine handwriting'--rather, it is saying the student is decent but not fantastic). Yet the people who get in to lower ranked programs generally have letters that say they are capable of succeeding at top-ranked ones.

 

3) If the question you asked your profs is "can you say positive things?" then your phrasing is a bit ambiguous and I could totally see a professor feeling comfortable both assenting to that inquiry and at the same time writing a letter like the one in 2). I asked my letter writers something more blunt: "Will your letter be strong enough to in theory help me get into Rutgers?" I figured that to get in anywhere, I needed letters that would be sufficient for "a Rutgers." I used Rutgers since it is the most selective school to which I want to apply in the first place, but you can substitute out whatever. The particular school you mention isn't important, being precise about how good you expect your letter to be is.

Edited February 18, 2014 by perpetualapplicant

[logos0516]

A few points:

 

1) There is a distinction between what a letter-writer thinks is a (sufficiently) positive letter and what is, and the two are not always co-extensive. A professor may think that what he or she is saying is great, but it may not look like other great letters. From what I understand anecdotally, this is especially common in 'across-the-pond' applications, as British letter writers are positive but honest, whereas American letter writers are (and hence American adcoms expect letters that are) positive and hyperbolic. Even if it's not true about British and Americans generally, it's possible in particular situations. So, if at all possible it's worth checking *how your letters were received* independent of how your letter writers intended them to be (I don't know if they still do this, but UC Davis used to send rejections with a form that told you what was wrong, that's how I found this out once). As a caveat, I add 'if at all possible' because admissions processes are putatively confidential. But if you are at CUNY, you can always ask a prof who knows someone at that school and see what happens--worst case, they say they can't do it.

 

2) Not all profs agree with you. All agree that writing a terrible letter is unethical, but some think that writing a decent, but unexceptional letter is not (i.e. 'this student is well suited to ranked programs in the bottom half' is technically not terrible--it's not 'the candidate has fine handwriting'--rather, it is saying the student is decent but not fantastic). Yet the people who get in to lower ranked programs generally have letters that say they are capable of succeeding at top-ranked ones.

 

3) If the question you asked your profs is "can you say positive things?" then your phrasing is a bit ambiguous and I could totally see a professor feeling comfortable both assenting to that inquiry and at the same time writing a letter like the one in 2). I asked my letter writers something more blunt: "Will your letter be strong enough to in theory help me get into Rutgers?" I figured that to get in anywhere, I needed letters that would be sufficient for "a Rutgers." I used Rutgers since it is the most selective school to which I want to apply in the first place, but you can substitute out whatever. The particular school you mention isn't important, being precise about how good you expect your letter to be is.

One: my letter-writer is not from "across the pond," and he is intimately familiar with all aspects of applying and is aware how competitive things are. Two: he knew the list of schools to which I was applying, and if he thought he couldn't write a letter sufficient to get me into those schools, he should have alerted me to this fact immediately and stated so in an honest, forthright manner. Three: since my professor is not autistic, but an articulate, aware and psychologically well-balanced individual who is also exceptionally intelligent, he knows the difference between a truly positive letter, and a positive-but-not-great letter. Combined with the assertion I made in point number two, the professor had a responsibility to inform me, or warn me, that the quality and caliber of his letter would not be sufficient to get me into the schools I applied to. He failed in that duty. I have recourse to complain. IF I find out, and believe me, I will find out, that there was a problem with that letter, I will take action within the university system to address it. It's my future on the line here, and he ruined it. Now he has to accept the academic consequences. 

[Table]

Now he has to accept the academic consequences. 

 

What do you think the academic consequences are for writing a letter that the applicant does not consider sufficiently stellar? 

[logos0516]

What do you think the academic consequences are for writing a letter that the applicant does not consider sufficiently stellar? 

At minimum, it is unethical. But alas, I get ahead of myself. I need to find out the content of the letter first. And since I waived access to my letters, that will be difficult, but I'm sure I can hear something through the grapevine. Last year this guy was on the admissions committee. What I *really* want to know is, is he on the admissions committee *this* year, and if so, what will he say when *my* application comes up? I suppose he would be bound to root for it, considering as he did write a letter for me, but now, I'm not so sure. 

[logos0516]

Now I'm not even sure I'll get into the school I'm currently studying at for my Master's: the same school at which this guy teaches and has had me for two classes. 

[ianfaircloud]

Three: since my professor is not autistic, but an articulate, aware and psychologically well-balanced individual who is also exceptionally intelligent, he knows the difference between a truly positive letter, and a positive-but-not-great letter. 

 

This post is wildly inappropriate and offensive.

[PerpetualApplicant No More]

One: my letter-writer is not from "across the pond," and he is intimately familiar with all aspects of applying and is aware how competitive things are.  Two: he knew the list of schools to which I was applying, and if he thought he couldn't write a letter sufficient to get me into those schools, he should have alerted me to this fact immediately and stated so in an honest, forthright manner. Three: since my professor is not autistic, but an articulate, aware and psychologically well-balanced individual who is also exceptionally intelligent, he knows the difference between a truly positive letter, and a positive-but-not-great letter. Combined with the assertion I made in point number two, the professor had a responsibility to inform me, or warn me, that the quality and caliber of his letter would not be sufficient to get me into the schools I applied to. He failed in that duty. I have recourse to complain. IF I find out, and believe me, I will find out, that there was a problem with that letter, I will take action within the university system to address it. It's my future on the line here, and he ruined it. Now he has to accept the academic consequences. 

I understand that you're frustrated (believe me, I do--I've been there!), but I think you're missing the bigger point here.

 

If, as you say, this is your future, and getting a ph.d. in philosophy is something you are determined to do with your future, then if you are getting rejected, the best thing you can do generally is find ways to improve your application for next year. I was really just using 'checking up on your letters' as an example of something you might be able to do in that vein. The general point is that (as those of us who have been doing this multiple times yet have received an offer this year can attest) getting shut out for a cycle is a roadblock, not a death blow, to your aspirations.

 

To that end, even if you were somehow able to censure a professor for a letter (which I doubt), I urge you to ask yourself: would it in any way help your application next year or academic career in general to do so?

 

Again, I'm really sorry that things aren't working out for you this year (really!!), but don't let your frustration lead you to doing something that cannot help and can only hurt your future.

[MattDest]

One: my letter-writer is not from "across the pond," and he is intimately familiar with all aspects of applying and is aware how competitive things are. Two: he knew the list of schools to which I was applying, and if he thought he couldn't write a letter sufficient to get me into those schools, he should have alerted me to this fact immediately and stated so in an honest, forthright manner. Three: since my professor is not autistic, but an articulate, aware and psychologically well-balanced individual who is also exceptionally intelligent, he knows the difference between a truly positive letter, and a positive-but-not-great letter. Combined with the assertion I made in point number two, the professor had a responsibility to inform me, or warn me, that the quality and caliber of his letter would not be sufficient to get me into the schools I applied to. He failed in that duty. I have recourse to complain. IF I find out, and believe me, I will find out, that there was a problem with that letter, I will take action within the university system to address it. It's my future on the line here, and he ruined it. Now he has to accept the academic consequences. 

 

 

This has to be a troll... right? 

[logos0516]

No, I suppose it wouldn't help, but I feel like I'm running out of options here, and don't know what to do. I already wrote a book that was accepted by an academic publisher. I got the MAster's coming from a Continental program. I got a 3.83 GPA, I got the letters. What the heck am I supposed to do next? Write another book? Write an article in a peer-reviewed journal? I feel like I'm out of options, and that waiting another year isn't going to do anything for me. I can't think of what would come next. SOmeone suggested teaching at a community college with a Master's until I apply next year, but that's just adding bells and whistles to the application. THat's not something that's going to impress an admissions committee.

[logos0516]

I understand that you're frustrated (believe me, I do--I've been there!), but I think you're missing the bigger point here.

 

If, as you say, this is your future, and getting a ph.d. in philosophy is something you are determined to do with your future, then if you are getting rejected, the best thing you can do generally is find ways to improve your application for next year. I was really just using 'checking up on your letters' as an example of something you might be able to do in that vein. The general point is that (as those of us who have been doing this multiple times yet have received an offer this year can attest) getting shut out for a cycle is a roadblock, not a death blow, to your aspirations.

 

To that end, even if you were somehow able to censure a professor for a letter (which I doubt), I urge you to ask yourself: would it in any way help your application next year or academic career in general to do so?

 

Again, I'm really sorry that things aren't working out for you this year (really!!), but don't let your frustration lead you to doing something that cannot help and can only hurt your future.

See above post

[ianfaircloud]

No, I suppose it wouldn't help, but I feel like I'm running out of options here, and don't know what to do. I already wrote a book that was accepted by an academic publisher. I got the MAster's coming from a Continental program. I got a 3.83 GPA, I got the letters. What the heck am I supposed to do next? Write another book? Write an article in a peer-reviewed journal? I feel like I'm out of options, and that waiting another year isn't going to do anything for me. I can't think of what would come next. SOmeone suggested teaching at a community college with a Master's until I apply next year, but that's just adding bells and whistles to the application. THat's not something that's going to impress an admissions committee.

 

Writing a book means very little. It's quality, not quantity, that gains admission to a graduate program in philosophy. They want people who can do more than write books. They want people who can write good books.

[logos0516]

Writing a book means very little. It's quality, not quantity, that gains admission to a graduate program in philosophy. They want people who can do more than write books. They want people who can write good books.

Excuse me, but WTF do you know about my book? How do you know my book isn't good? Have you read it? Have you read one word of one sentence? No. But go on, just assume my book isn't good. How many books have you written that have gotten published before getting a doctorate? I'm guessing zero. 

[ianfaircloud]

No, I suppose it wouldn't help, but I feel like I'm running out of options here, and don't know what to do. I already wrote a book that was accepted by an academic publisher. I got the MAster's coming from a Continental program. I got a 3.83 GPA, I got the letters. What the heck am I supposed to do next? Write another book? Write an article in a peer-reviewed journal? I feel like I'm out of options, and that waiting another year isn't going to do anything for me. . . . 

 

Honestly, from reading your posts, I think the right course for you is to give up on philosophy. It's not working for you. You've devoted much to it with little return. As you've said yourself, there's almost nothing else you can do. You say you have run out of options? Indeed, you have. It's clear, just from reading your posts, that you should give up and move on.