Dear 2015 applicants, here is what we have learned from the 2014 season

[jjb919]

I'm in the same boat as Nastasya-Filippovna.  I have been working hard to rework and narrow down my MA thesis and I'm currently at 27 pages. I'm continuing to work on it and think I can get it down another 1-2 pages, but I think that's as far as I can go without sacrificing important pieces of my argument. Some of the schools I'm applying to have no word/page limit, which is nice, while others have ostensibly hard limits. I don't think my paper will be grossly over those limits, and I don't think my application will be thrown out solely because of the fact that it is over those limits (seems unreasonable, but of course I don't know the details of some departments' admissions practices), so I don't plan on going through a large amount of headache editing my WS further to meet all of the individual limits. I'll get it as short, concise, and sharp as I can and then I'll send it.  If some adcoms stop reading after 6,000 words, or 15, 20 pages then so be it.  If I've done a good enough job, hopefully they'll want to keep reading!

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

thanks so much for the feedback, and @ jjb919, it's good to know I'm not alone at least! it's so brutal cutting down a thesis paper- this was my baby for so long and I despise having to part with each and every salient little detail! By the way, I see on your lists of philosophical interests that you are interested in both embodied cognition and various areas of continental study- that is very rare and exciting - same goes for me! I am interested in philosophy of mind, postmodern areas of philosophy of science (Kuhn and feyerabend in particular), and german idealism and 19th century continental philosophy!

[dgswaim]

thanks so much for the feedback, and @ jjb919, it's good to know I'm not alone at least! it's so brutal cutting down a thesis paper- this was my baby for so long and I despise having to part with each and every salient little detail! By the way, I see on your lists of philosophical interests that you are interested in both embodied cognition and various areas of continental study- that is very rare and exciting - same goes for me! I am interested in philosophy of mind, postmodern areas of philosophy of science (Kuhn and feyerabend in particular), and german idealism and 19th century continental philosophy!

Kuhn and Feyerabend are super interesting figures. Phil science is my main area, and while I take more of a realist tack, I appreciate that Kuhn, Feyerabend, Van Fraasen and the like have given scientists and philosophers alike some serious conceptual problems to think through. "Against Method" is perhaps the most fun I ever had with respect to reading in philosophy of science.

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

that's fantastic you can appreciate them as well- in my phil of science course, we only read excerpts from Against Method so I'm reading it in entirety now and just loving it. There are some in the realist camp who are just excellent too- I know in philosophy of mind, I adore Jaegwon Kim, even though I personally side with nonreductionism. He is one of the most articulate contemporary philosophers and makes such persuasive arguments - he always leaves me second-guessing myself! I was very lucky to have an astounding analytic/scientific professor of philosophy for my undergrad career - he got me swept up in these topics.

[dgswaim]

that's fantastic you can appreciate them as well- in my phil of science course, we only read excerpts from Against Method so I'm reading it in entirety now and just loving it. There are some in the realist camp who are just excellent too- I know in philosophy of mind, I adore Jaegwon Kim, even though I personally side with nonreductionism. He is one of the most articulate contemporary philosophers and makes such persuasive arguments - he always leaves me second-guessing myself! I was very lucky to have an astounding analytic/scientific professor of philosophy for my undergrad career - he got me swept up in these topics.

Jaegwon is cool... but I'm no physicalist. I'm more apt to a Frank Jackson, Howard Robinson, EJ Lowe type realism.

[jjb919]

By the way, I see on your lists of philosophical interests that you are interested in both embodied cognition and various areas of continental study- that is very rare and exciting - same goes for me! I am interested in philosophy of mind, postmodern areas of philosophy of science (Kuhn and feyerabend in particular), and german idealism and 19th century continental philosophy!

 

That's excellent to hear! Where are you thinking of applying? My exposure to embodied cognition is still relatively recent and so far I have mostly read the work of Shaun Gallagher, Dan Zahavi, Evan Thompson, and Mark Johnson.

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

I'm going to have to check some of those figures out - I've only had the smallest introduction to embodied cognition myself, and I want to learn more about it myself - right now I've only been studying reductive vs nonreductive physicalism and mental causation. I've only read excerpts from Andy Clark, and my one professor was telling me about a more recent theory in embodied cognition (sadly I cannot even remember the theory!), but it's an advance on computationalism, which sounds really interesting, and he says he will give me some names and books- I'll have to pass that info on to you! I'm looking seriously at U. of Oregon, Georegtown, Northwestern the two Bostons as well, along with a few universities in Cali and a few others in the northeast - Cuny, Columbia, Brown and of course the pillar of philosophy, NYU (one can dream, can't they?) Mainly the programs that appear to be strong in both continental and philosophy of mind. 

[dgswaim]

Alva Noe is a pretty innovative figure in embodied cognition. Also, though he's not a philosopher proper, Raymond Tallis has a lot to say about embodied cognition, physicalism/reduction/non-physicalism, and the communal structure of mind in his book "Aping Mankind" (he's also hilarious, which doesn't hurt).

[jjb919]

These are some great suggestions, thank you guys!  I'll be sure to look into them.  @Nastasya_Filippovna, looks like we are applying to many of the same schools! I wish you the best, and hopefully we'll see each other at a couple accepted student visits!

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

@jjb919 I certainly wish you the best too- and oh man I sure hope we do!! I already have butterflies about this next year! 

[alopachuca]

I envy that you guys have choices of papers to condense. I have papers that are worthy of expanding a few pages, but coming out of public undergrad means most papers are short. I've been yelled at by my grad student instructors for going over the limit. Might apply strictly to MAs because of the writing sample alone. 

[jjb919]

I envy that you guys have choices of papers to condense. I have papers that are worthy of expanding a few pages, but coming out of public undergrad means most papers are short. I've been yelled at by my grad student instructors for going over the limit. Might apply strictly to MAs because of the writing sample alone. 

 

Length is not an indicator of quality.  In fact, if you can make the same point in less pages that is preferable and more powerful.  All my whining about not being able to cut down my WP is just that.  Every time I go back to it and just it a little more, streamline it a little more, it comes out better. Don't sell yourself short just because your writing sample isn't long (of course, it needs to me long enough to deal seriously and deeply with an issue, but that is possible in 10-15 pages). Take a step back, figure out what you're really trying to say (and this is a hard thing to uncover; it can take many drafts and many conversations with your teachers where they challenge you and criticize your arguments), and write it as concisely as possible. Ad coms would much rather read a solid 10 page paper than one that says the same thing put takes 25 pages to do it.  

[philosopheme]

I envy that you guys have choices of papers to condense. I have papers that are worthy of expanding a few pages, but coming out of public undergrad means most papers are short. I've been yelled at by my grad student instructors for going over the limit. Might apply strictly to MAs because of the writing sample alone. 

 

I've heard some good reasons not to write an entirely new paper for your writing sample, but considering you have six+ months before applications are due, if you really don't think any of your papers are of the requisite quality (not length, but quality), maybe it's worth considering this option rather than just limiting your application process. But don't make this judgment alone! Ask your professors if they think that none of your papers are of high enough quality. Or, if you got feedback saying that some areas could/should be expanded, or if you had ideas of how to make papers longer, then maybe taking these few months to add some new sections are go more into depth would help turn a solid undergrad paper into a formidible writing sample. Additionally, if you go back and make changes to some of your papers that you wrote for classes you took with your letter-writers, showing them that you went back and took their suggestions and are engaged could really boost the quality of your letters, as an added bonus (although here it's maybe worth asking your letter-writers if you're interested in doing that: i had one point-blank tell me they could write me a much better letter if I revised a promising, yet underdeveleoped, term paper I wrote for one of her courses, and I had another point-blank tell me that they wouldn't have time to read anything, but that I shouldn't worry about the quality of my letter).

 

All this to say, if you don't have the time/energy/desire to write a completely new ~20 page paper in six months, and you aren't proud of anything you already have as-is, then it probably is wiser to go into the revision process (with some faculty if possible) than only apply to MAs.

[Billy Goehring]

Length is not an indicator of quality.  In fact, if you can make the same point in less pages that is preferable and more powerful.  All my whining about not being able to cut down my WP is just that.  Every time I go back to it and just it a little more, streamline it a little more, it comes out better. Don't sell yourself short just because your writing sample isn't long (of course, it needs to me long enough to deal seriously and deeply with an issue, but that is possible in 10-15 pages). Take a step back, figure out what you're really trying to say (and this is a hard thing to uncover; it can take many drafts and many conversations with your teachers where they challenge you and criticize your arguments), and write it as concisely as possible. Ad coms would much rather read a solid 10 page paper than one that says the same thing put takes 25 pages to do it.  

 

Also, people, don't forget that many schools have page requirements. If the limit is 15 pages, turning in 25 pages won't necessarily get you disqualified, but since adcoms go through hundreds of applications, there's no real incentive for them to read an extra ten pages. Every professor I've talked to about admissions has said the same: follow instructions. Going over the limit is bad news for conferences, journal submissions, etc--it's best to get into the habit now of working within page or word-count limits. A strong paper that follows the app's instructions is going to do better than a strong paper that doesn't. 

[alopachuca]

jjb919, 

 

Thanks for the response. I do appreciate the sentiment. (Not to so say your comment is only a sentiment, because you make good points). I'm confident I'll make it work.   

 

philosopheme,

 

I think what I'm struggling with is precisely this decision of whether to expand something I've already written or start from scratch. You mention I should consider whether any of my papers are of requisite quality. Admittedly, I don't know what to look for in this case. I would say several of my papers are philosphically mature, well organized, and show some philosophical independence. But when I brought up some of the topics I was hoping to expand with one of my letter writers, this person advised against these topics because they weren't "hot topics" in the field. (To what extent picking a hot topic will be necessary, I still need to figure out). I think I need a bit more research in what adcoms will be looking for precisely in the writing sample. Thank you very much for the response. 

[Gnothi_Seauton]

jjb919, 

 

Thanks for the response. I do appreciate the sentiment. (Not to so say your comment is only a sentiment, because you make good points). I'm confident I'll make it work. 

 

philosopheme,

 

I think what I'm struggling with is precisely this decision of whether to expand something I've already written or start from scratch. You mention I should consider whether any of my papers are of requisite quality. Admittedly, I don't know what to look for in this case. I would say several of my papers are philosphically mature, well organized, and show some philosophical independence. But when I brought up some of the topics I was hoping to expand with one of my letter writers, this person advised against these topics because they weren't "hot topics" in the field. (To what extent picking a hot topic will be necessary, I still need to figure out). I think I need a bit more research in what adcoms will be looking for precisely in the writing sample. Thank you very much for the response. 

W/r/t "hot topics," for what it's worth, when I visited WashU, some of the professors there said they got really bored/annoyed reading a hundred writing samples all about the same "hot topic."  I think this past year metaphysical grounding and evolution and morality were both really big.  I think it is more important to say something new and interesting about any topic you want than it is to stick with a topic that is popular in the literature at the moment.  I think the best thing a writing sample can be is original.  You don't want to rehash old arguments in favor of some position.  You don't want to do a massive literature review only to say something small and original at the end.  You want to have an idea (about any topic you want) and develop it in a really clear way. 

[Establishment]

W/r/t "hot topics," for what it's worth, when I visited WashU, some of the professors there said they got really bored/annoyed reading a hundred writing samples all about the same "hot topic."  I think this past year metaphysical grounding and evolution and morality were both really big.  I think it is more important to say something new and interesting about any topic you want than it is to stick with a topic that is popular in the literature at the moment.  I think the best thing a writing sample can be is original.  You don't want to rehash old arguments in favor of some position.  You don't want to do a massive literature review only to say something small and original at the end.  You want to have an idea (about any topic you want) and develop it in a really clear way. 

 

Yeah, if anything it seems that working on "hot topics" could put you at disadvantage. I heard that metaethics was a huge topic this year. If you're submitting a paper in that area, you're more likely going to have to compete with those others who have writing samples much more immediately comparable to yours.

[philosopheme]

 

philosopheme,

 

I think what I'm struggling with is precisely this decision of whether to expand something I've already written or start from scratch. You mention I should consider whether any of my papers are of requisite quality. Admittedly, I don't know what to look for in this case. I would say several of my papers are philosphically mature, well organized, and show some philosophical independence. But when I brought up some of the topics I was hoping to expand with one of my letter writers, this person advised against these topics because they weren't "hot topics" in the field. (To what extent picking a hot topic will be necessary, I still need to figure out). I think I need a bit more research in what adcoms will be looking for precisely in the writing sample. Thank you very much for the response. 

 

So I can only write from personal experience here, but the advice I got (and followed with some success) was that it's more important to make it clear why your topic is of 'general philosophical interest/significance' than to be writing about a 'hot topic.' Of course, the two options aren't exclusive, and hopefully hot topics are hot topics because they're of general philosophical interest and significance!

 

But for me, I stuck with a paper I was proud of from a class on paradoxen and the logic of truth, even though it was about a type of logic (dialetheism) that is considered kind of 'crackpot' in some (most?) circles. I thought it made a novel claim about the topic as it currently is, and had interesting-to-me implications for the future of the topic. So I wanted to stick with it, and the two things I tried to do were (i) make it very clear why I thought this paper was going to do and say interesting and new things about the topic in a way that people coming in with no background or with total skepticism should still be able to appreciate as significant, and (ii) try to make explicit (and immediate) connections between this kind of crazy logic and more mainstream topics in other areas of philosophy that I think are of 'general philosophical significance.' This was hard (but also fun) to fit into the paper as it was currently set up, but the result was that I got to keep the core of the paper I had already written with the argument/proof I had already labored over, but got to spin it in a way such that I didn't think it was going to be offputtingly niche to admissions committees.

 

*I also made sure to focus on other interests of mine in my personal statement, doing everything I could to avoid being labeled 'the dialetheist guy' in admissions circles. Maybe if you're into some hot topics, it's especially important to bring up your interest/background in those issues in your personal statement, since they're relevant and popular. Maybe. *

[smg]

Any tips for writing a sample from scratch?    I havent written a scholarly paper since 2007 and probably 2005 or longer since I've written a philosophy paper. 

[dgswaim]

Any tips for writing a sample from scratch?    I havent written a scholarly paper since 2007 and probably 2005 or longer since I've written a philosophy paper. 

Do you know anyone that has been actively engaged in academic writing? If so, I'd start by letting them read your work (if you trust his or her insight, that is). 

[Gnothi_Seauton]

Now that the fall semester is about to begin and prospective applicants are starting to get the pieces of their applications together, I thought I'd share my thoughts on the application/admissions process.  Everything I say should be taken with a grain of salt, since the basis of most of my claims is going to be "impressions" I've gotten from meeting prospective students and professors and watching things unfold on the gradcafe last admissions season.  I'm also going to make claims about "usual cases."  For instance, I'm going to claim that having a high GPA is important, but that's not to say that no one with a low GPA has a chance of getting into a top program.  I'm going to begin by saying something about the different parts of the application and then move on to more general thoughts.  

 

The online application:  You'll have to fill one out for every school you apply to.  They are annoying, and they take a bunch of time, so be prepared to dedicate several hours to filling these things out, particularly if you plan to apply to 10+ schools.  Most of what you're filling in is basic info (name, date of birth, etc.), but some stuff might seem important (there are spaces to fill in different awards you've received, for instance).  I would say go ahead and fill that stuff in, but don't spend too much time getting descriptive.  Submit a CV as a supplementary document, and any of those bonus parts of your application will be in one place.  I doubt the admissions committees spend much time going through the info on the online application.  They'll spend the majority of their time on the other stuff. 

 

GPA:  This is important.  If you're coming straight from undergrad, you might very well struggle with a GPA under, say, 3.7 or so (unless you are coming from a top notch university, you're coming from a school with a reputation for avoiding grade inflation, or you have a justifiable excuse for why your GPA is lower [must be explained by a letter writer]).  The philosophy GPA is even more important than overall.  Unless you attended a super prestigious university, you'll want it to be as close to perfect as possible (and even then, below 3.8 will raise red flags [again, absent justifiable excuses]).  

 

GRE:  This is less important than most people seem to think.  It is probably true that some programs use it as an initial screen, but I also think your scores would have to be pretty low to rule you out.  I also think that the GRE matters more for people coming from less prestigious undergrad institutions (when your letter writers are going to be less familiar, the rest of your application needs to be firing on all cylinders).  For top programs, I would say you should shoot for 160+ for verbal (and ideally 165+) and 155+ for quantitative.  No one cares about your writing score (they have a sample of your actual writing after all).  

 

Statement of purpose:  Just be straightforward and professional.  Describe your interests, but don't actively argue for any positions.  It's a good thing if you can sound relatively sophisticated about your interests.  I think the easiest way to do that is to describe work you've actually done in the past.  That allows you to be generic with your interests, but sophisticated in your elaboration.  So, for example, you could say, "I'm interested in moral philosophy generally, but I've worked primarily on Kantian ethics.  In my senior thesis, I argue for the view that Christine Korsgaard's version of Kantian constructivism must make use of unconstructed normative facts and thus collapses into a form of traditional moral realism."  (I didn't say this in mine [i'm not even sure if I believe what I just said], just using a possible example).  The nice thing about this way of stating your interests is that you aren't pigeon-holing yourself (in this case, as someone only interested in Kantian ethics) since you claim to be interested in ethics in general, but then you can sound like you actually know what you're talking about by describing more sophisticated work you've done.  I also think that naming professors you'd be interested in working with is a good idea, if done well.  Never attempt to fit a professor's interests into your own.  A professor doesn't count as sharing your interests if he/she wrote a paper twenty years ago on a topic of interest to you but never wrote anything else on it again (unless, perhaps, it's a classic paper or something).  It always sounds better if you've actually read the professor's work.  So, go ahead and name names, but just be careful how you do it.  "I would love to work with Peter Singer because he's interested in ethics" is not good enough.  

 

Letters of Recommendation:  I think that these are more important than departments let on.  When I initially visited UNC, I can't tell you how many times I heard, "Oh, you're so-and-so's student" or "How's so-and-so?"  Here, "so-and-so" refers to someone who wrote a letter for a prospective student.  It's innocent enough.  It just so happens that philosophers at top places tend to be friends with philosophers at other top places.  A letter from a friend or, at least, someone the committee knows and respects is more meaningful than a letter from an unknown person.  I'm not saying that it's justified, only that I understand why those letters stand out more.  I hate to say it, but if your letters aren't from relatively well-known philosophers, they had better be glowing.  (And I should be clear here:  Not everyone in my class at UNC had letters from famous philosophers.  I don't want to give that impression.  I'm just saying it helps more than people think.)

 

Writing sample:  You've heard it a million times, but this really is the most important part of the application.  I had long conversations about my writing sample with professors at two of the three departments I visited.  They'll know your writing sample well.  And I don't think it's enough for a writing sample to be nothing more than a literature review.  I also don't think it's enough if the sample only makes one small, original point at the end.  The sample should develop an original argument in favor of some position.  It's perfectly fine if the argument builds off the work of others (not many arguments are *completely* original).  It's just really important for the argument to be in your own voice.  If the paper says, "I'm going to defend the view that X.  Hume argues for A, B, and C as follows...It follows from A, B, and C that X.  Thus, I have defended X," then that's not enough in your own voice (unless you come up with novel ways of defending A, B, and C).  Also, I think whether the topic is "fresh" matters only to the extent that it bears on the originality of what you have to say.  Some topics have been done to death, and so it's hard to say anything particularly original.  But some "hot" topics are so popular that admissions committees have to read 150 samples all about the same topic (which bores them, or so I was told by some admissions committee members).  But no matter what the topic, if you can say something original in a compelling way, you're in with a shot.  I think that originality is probably slightly less important if you are writing on a topic that allows you to show off other philosophical virtues.  So, for example, if you are writing clearly about a really technical area of philosophy, originality is probably a bit less important.  And obviously the paper needs to be structured well and clearly written and exhibit all the usual signs of good writing. 

 

Other things:  I think the strength of one's undergraduate institution matters to the extent that it bears on who is writing letters.  I think it's true that coming from an undergrad institution without a reputation in philosophy is a disadvantage, but only because the letter writers will be unfamiliar to the admissions committee.  Letters have to be much stronger when written by unknown professors.  There's actually a good reason for this.  If Kit Fine writes a letter for an undergrad saying basically, "This student is very good, and I think she'd do well in graduate school," that's sufficient coming from him because NYU produces so many top quality students (and he has a good idea of what it takes to succeed in a top program).  But the admissions committee does not likely put the same confidence in a letter from an unknown professor.

 

Publications might be meaningful if they are in solid professional journals.  Undergrad and grad journals are meaningless (some people think they actually hurt an application; I doubt that's true).  Publishing outside philosophy is pretty much meaningless (unless it's in an area directly connected with your areas of interest).  "Best student" or "Best paper" awards are nice, but won't count for much.  The key is that there's a fundamental distinction between direct and indirect evidence for philosophical ability.  All of the little "extras" like awards are all indirect evidence.  The committee is going to focus on the direct evidence, the most direct of which is your writing sample.  

 

The admissions process is stressful.  I was worried about a lot of things going in.  I went to a relatively weak undergrad institution, but a solid overseas institution for an MSc (but I didn't know how admissions committees in the US would view it). I had a "W" on my transcript.  My GRE writing score was lower than I wanted it to be.  But, on reflection, I think these were things that I shouldn't have worried about.  I think the best advice I could give would be this:  don't sweat the small stuff (or the stuff you can't control).  The writing sample is far and away the most important part of the application.  You're in with a shot if your writing sample is awesome, so if you're going to spend time focusing on something, focus on improving the writing sample.  A less-than-stellar piece of an application can be overcome with a great writing sample, but a mediocre writing sample will keep you out.  Basically, a great writing sample is necessary, but not sufficient for admissions.  

 

I'm happy to answer questions or talk about the process in more detail with any prospective applicants.  Just shoot me a message.

Edited August 16, 2014 by Gnothi_Seauton

[Philhopeful]

^ Really top notch advice right there. It inspires me to add a little bit of my own that I usually don't see mentioned here. As always, take with a grain of salt.

 

Letter Writers: The most unpredictable part of the application. So much can go wrong. You might have one that says they only need papers from the class you took with them, and then they might represent your interests different than another professor does. They might say something tone deaf with realizing it (especially a risk if you have international writers). Heck, they might just keep procrastinating turning your letters in even after they have them written (one of my professors didn't do it until a month and a half after my last deadlines.) But they can also sometimes go the extra mile and even email professors you want to work with at other institutions and tell them to be on the look out for your application. In either case, they are kind of a wild card, and you want to do what you can to reduce the possibility of something going wrong. You should do whatever you can to get your letter writers to take a cheat sheet listing your past courses, interests, and accomplishments, or even better yet to give them a copy of your personal statement when you ask for the letter. Additionally, if you have an international writer, you should check if they have written US letters of recommendation before and offer to direct them to people at your department if they have questions about conventions.

 

The Super Advisor: If you are in a position where you still don't have a single adviser picked out, you should be on the lookout for people who you think are really ready in invest in you. Here are some examples of things that a super adviser might do for you (usually spontaneously): probe other professors you've taken courses with and then email you saying that they will write you strong additional recommendation letters if you send them your materials, offer to read every single one of your school specific personal statements, send you random encouraging emails as the process drags on, introduce you to faculty at other departments at conferences so you can get different reactions to your work, will tell you you got in or didn't get in somewhere before the emails go out because they ran into someone and asked.

 

Writing Samples: There are a lot of different ways of being original that don't always involve supporting or attacking someone else's argument. For instance, you could write a paper observing interesting unrecognized structural similarities between a few different arguments, you could write a paper looking for ways that a particular debate is unclear and asking an original question, or you could argue that there are connections between two different debates that haven't been appreciated. Papers doing any of those things will probably stand out some just by virtue of trying to be original in a different way. 

 

Departmental Fit: It doesn't always just mean that your interests mesh well with people who are already at the department. Different departments can also have different values. At one department I visited, I was told that, all else being equal, they especially looked for people who showed promise in constructing creative arguments. At another, I was told that they especially valued applicants whose personalities were conducive to a cooperative and accessible learning environment. There's no advice here really, but its something that I never thought of at all until after I started visiting.

[Gnothi_Seauton]

Just wanted to register my agreement with Philhopeful's comments about originality in writing samples.  There are a bunch of ways to be original.  The key is to make sure that, whatever you write about, it's your own argument.  Don't just present and agree with someone else's argument.  

 

And fit is also super important (another good thing to bring up, Philhopeful).  I think it goes hand-in-hand with what I said about naming names in your statement of purpose.  If you find yourself struggling to make your interests fit, it's probably not the school for you.

Edited August 16, 2014 by Gnothi_Seauton

[Infinite Zest]

This is all great advice!

[philstudent1991]

It's my first day of grad school today and I thought I'd check in for old time's sake. My biggest advice to people on here now is to get off this is a cool site for when you are waiting on acceptances, but right now be working on your classes, thinking about your letters, your programs of choice and your samples oh and the GRE if you haven't already taken it!