Question about Phd Application

[logos0516]

I think the situation is basically identical to submitting 2 writing samples, which some people do. (ex. if one is very technical) 

 

I'm not sure why it would be unfair for people to be able to get an advantage by submitting materials beyond what is required. You can submit extra letters, which I'm sure has the potential to sway a decision. Many applications have a specific spot to upload any extra materials you think are relevant or a place to put a link to something. These things might not get a lot of attention, but they don't seem unfair. 

It's no more unfair than the fact that an applicant to a Phd program who went to that same school's undergrad institution will be perceived more favorably since he is already known to faculty members in the department. It is just the way it is. The fact that someone at the same undergrad institution as the grad program he is applying to has an advantage is by no means unreasonable or "unfair." Like I said, admissions committees likely take into account all materials relevant to the question of whether an applicant can and most likely will succeed in a rigorous graduate Phd program.

[MattDest]

It's no more unfair than the fact that an applicant to a Phd program who went to that same school's undergrad institution will be perceived more favorably since he is already known to faculty members in the department. It is just the way it is. The fact that someone at the same undergrad institution as the grad program he is applying to has an advantage is by no means unreasonable or "unfair." Like I said, admissions committees likely take into account all materials relevant to the question of whether an applicant can and most likely will succeed in a rigorous graduate Phd program.

 

Most of the people I have talked to who went to graduate school from an undergraduate institution were encouraged to apply elsewhere. It seems to be harder to get into a PhD program when you did your undergraduate studies there. The same is likely true of MA to PhD transitions (the whole 'get no special treatment' isn't just a disclaimer, but seems a perhaps understated reality). 

 

In other words, I don't think that's an advantage at all. In fact, for most adcoms, it's probably a disadvantage. 

[Mavngoose1]

Most of the people I have talked to who went to graduate school from an undergraduate institution were encouraged to apply elsewhere. It seems to be harder to get into a PhD program when you did your undergraduate studies there. The same is likely true of MA to PhD transitions (the whole 'get no special treatment' isn't just a disclaimer, but seems a perhaps understated reality).

In other words, I don't think that's an advantage at all. In fact, for most adcoms, it's probably a disadvantage.

This is what I was told by my school. It is certainly not an advantage even if it is not a disadvantage.

[logos0516]

I think I will resolve this debate about the advantages and disadvantages of applying to a Phd program from the same MA program by e-mailing one or two of my professors. I want to hear from people in the department what they say, and I think that will most likely be the true indicator of what will likely happen. In my two years being at CUNY, each year I have seen people from the MA program get admitted to the Phd program. Even one guy who was the husband of a Phd candidate was admitted the year after she was admitted. So the trend here seems to be positive. But I'm going to confirm that now with a professor. 

[logos0516]

Most of the people I have talked to who went to graduate school from an undergraduate institution were encouraged to apply elsewhere. It seems to be harder to get into a PhD program when you did your undergraduate studies there. The same is likely true of MA to PhD transitions (the whole 'get no special treatment' isn't just a disclaimer, but seems a perhaps understated reality). 

 

In other words, I don't think that's an advantage at all. In fact, for most adcoms, it's probably a disadvantage. 

Don't forget though, admissions committee members are people, too. Whether they would admit it or not, and whether they even realize it or not, when you come across an applicant's file and say "oh, yeah, Joe Smith, I know him, I've seen him around the department, and I've had him in class" that is bound to have a psychological effect on the admissions committee, whether they like it or not. And plus, it is harder for admissions committee members to reject an applicant who has letters written by faculty members they know and work with. Same thing: the adcom says "yeah, Joe Smith has a rec letter from Jill Jones, I like her/she's a good professor/I get along with her." All these little intangibles matter too. 

[logos0516]

I spoke to a professor of mine who is not on the admissions committee and does not know the work of the adcom, but he said he certainly didn't think having an MA from the same institution to which I am applying would be a disadvantage.

[brettmullga]

Most of the people I have talked to who went to graduate school from an undergraduate institution were encouraged to apply elsewhere. It seems to be harder to get into a PhD program when you did your undergraduate studies there. The same is likely true of MA to PhD transitions (the whole 'get no special treatment' isn't just a disclaimer, but seems a perhaps understated reality). 

 

In other words, I don't think that's an advantage at all. In fact, for most adcoms, it's probably a disadvantage. 

 

I was told the same, and it opened my eyes to new programs. I'm glad it happened too!

 

Edit: The head of the ad com at my undergrad institution referred to it as academic incest, with regard to doing both undergrad and PhD at the same place. 

Edited February 18, 2014 by brettmullga

[MattDest]

I spoke to a professor of mine who is not on the admissions committee and does not know the work of the adcom, but he said he certainly didn't think having an MA from the same institution to which I am applying would be a disadvantage.

 

 

I understand why you're nervous (all of us are, believe us!), but I'm just relaying the testimony that I've gotten from advisors and other graduate students. Cheers!

[SelfHatingPhilosopher]

I was told the same, and it opened my eyes to new programs. I'm glad it happened too!

 

Edit: The head of the ad com at my undergrad institution referred to it as academic incest, with regard to doing both undergrad and PhD at the same place. 

 

Premise 1: Early humans practiced incest because of Adam and Eve were the only humans there were. But then as they peopled the Earth, the practice of incest stopped.

Premise 2: Early philosophers often committed academic incest from the BA to the PhD. But now that the field has grown, the practice has stopped.

Conclusion: Check-mate, atheists.

Edited February 18, 2014 by SelfHatingPhilosopher

[MattDest]

Premise 1: Early humans practiced incest because of Adam and Eve were the only humans there were. But then as they peopled the Earth, the practice of incest stopped.

Premise 2: Early philosophers often committed academic incest from the BA to the PhD. But now that the field has grown, the practice has stopped.

Conclusion: Check-mate, atheists.

 

Did you crib this from the Plantinga interview?

[logos0516]

Does anybody know if Arizona has sent out all their acceptances?

[humean_skeptic]

Does anybody know if Arizona has sent out all their acceptances?

 Yes. http://thegradcafe.com/survey/index.php?q=philosophy+arizona&t=a&o=&pp=25

[ZiggyPhil]

You're not going to like hearing this, but I think it's important enough that I'm going to say it anyway.

 

I looked up Wipf and Stock, and I read through their (rather lengthy) "Author Guide".  They are clearly a vanity press.  It appears they publish some works on a more traditional model in order to achieve some "credibility", but a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.  They make their money by charging authors for copy editing and/or typesetting (depending on which imprint you use).  After a very small initial print run of 20 or so books (which all go to the author, and which are funded by a part of the fees authors pay), they operate as a print on demand service with no marketing and essentially no distribution system. 

 

If you're happy to have your book printed in this way that's fine, but please realize that philosophy departments will not view it as a serious work of scholarship published by a legitimate academic press, and that including it with your applications will be devastating to your chances of admission.  For any admissions committee who receives it, I'd estimate there's (at most) a 0.1% chance it will be seen as a positive.  It will near-universally be seen as a black mark against your application, and many (most?) departments will reject your application based solely on its inclusion.

 

I'm sorry if this is upsetting, but I am trying to be of help.  I suspect you will want to contest my characterization of your publisher, but I will not argue that point further.  Of course you may well be admitted somewhere you didn't submit the book, but if you are not admitted and decide to apply again next year, I strongly urge you not to include or make any mention of the book on your application. 

[logos0516]

You're not going to like hearing this, but I think it's important enough that I'm going to say it anyway.

 

I looked up Wipf and Stock, and I read through their (rather lengthy) "Author Guide".  They are clearly a vanity press.  It appears they publish some works on a more traditional model in order to achieve some "credibility", but a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.  They make their money by charging authors for copy editing and/or typesetting (depending on which imprint you use).  After a very small initial print run of 20 or so books (which all go to the author, and which are funded by a part of the fees authors pay), they operate as a print on demand service with no marketing and essentially no distribution system. 

 

If you're happy to have your book printed in this way that's fine, but please realize that philosophy departments will not view it as a serious work of scholarship published by a legitimate academic press, and that including it with your applications will be devastating to your chances of admission.  For any admissions committee who receives it, I'd estimate there's (at most) a 0.1% chance it will be seen as a positive.  It will near-universally be seen as a black mark against your application, and many (most?) departments will reject your application based solely on its inclusion.

 

I'm sorry if this is upsetting, but I am trying to be of help.  I suspect you will want to contest my characterization of your publisher, but I will not argue that point further.  Of course you may well be admitted somewhere you didn't submit the book, but if you are not admitted and decide to apply again next year, I strongly urge you not to include or make any mention of the book on your application. 

Yeah it was a complicated decision whether to send the book or not. I just thought using everything I had might help, but ultimately it probably depends on how much they know about the publisher, and/or how much they actually investigate the publisher themselves. I can't argue with what you're saying.

[Table]

You're not going to like hearing this, but I think it's important enough that I'm going to say it anyway.

 

I looked up Wipf and Stock, and I read through their (rather lengthy) "Author Guide".  They are clearly a vanity press.  It appears they publish some works on a more traditional model in order to achieve some "credibility", but a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.  They make their money by charging authors for copy editing and/or typesetting (depending on which imprint you use).  After a very small initial print run of 20 or so books (which all go to the author, and which are funded by a part of the fees authors pay), they operate as a print on demand service with no marketing and essentially no distribution system. 

 

I also looked at their author guide, and it looked like only one of their imprints requires authors to pay…?

[MattDest]

Yeah it was a complicated decision whether to send the book or not. I just thought using everything I had might help, but ultimately it probably depends on how much they know about the publisher, and/or how much they actually investigate the publisher themselves. I can't argue with what you're saying.

 

 

Wait, then why were you making such a fuss elsewhere about someone saying a book wouldn't be an advantage?