Post your letter

[ianfaircloud]

If you get an admission notification (admit, wait-list, deny/reject) letter written by a member of a philosophy department (so not by the dean of admissions or arts and sciences or other administrator), please remove your personal identifying information (e.g. your name) and post the letter here.  Include the date on which you received the letter.  I'll go first (with the only wait-list that I received last year):

 

February 25, 2014

Dear [name],

We are writing with an update on your application status.

Recently, we informed a small group of applicants that they were being admitted to our graduate program for fall 2014; we also informed a very large group of applicants that we will not be accepting them. We are writing now to tell you that your application is still under serious consideration and thus you are on our wait-list.

We do not expect to be able to admit anyone from the wait list soon, particularly since we are required by the Council of Graduate Schools to give our accepted students until April 15th to decide. Eventually, we'll be able to give you a more definite sense of where you stand on the wait list, but that will probably happen in April, nearer to the deadline.

It may be helpful to know our support package at this time. Here is the funding you will receive if you are admitted to UW-Madison Philosophy:

First and Second Years: TA salary of at least $10,454 plus $1,000 department scholarship each semester ($2,000 total per year). The $10,454 salary is based on an assignment of teaching 3 discussion sections per week, but in almost every case grad students have taught 4 sections a week--the total annual funding for a 4 section TA (including the scholarship) is $14,288. TAs are exempted from paying tuition but they do pay segregated fees. They also pay a standard fee for an excellent health insurance plan (currently $44.00 per month for a single person, $109.50 for a family plan.)

Third-Fifth Years: Funding during these 3 years is also guaranteed. Typically the 3rd year students are supported as a TA, and the 4th and 5th years, as either a Lecturer or TA. TAs can anticipate a raise in pay once they are promoted to dissertator, typically at the end of the 3rd year.

We hope that you are still interested in joining our graduate program. If you have questions about our program or the admissions process, please let us know. And of course if you do accept another offer, we would appreciate it (and I'm sure the others on the wait list would, too) if you'd inform us.

Admissions Committee
Philosophy Department
University of Wisconsin-Madison

 

And here's the famous Ted Sider email:

 

March 3, 2014

 

Dear [name],

I'm afraid I have some bad news:  we are unable to offer you admission to Cornell.  

The application pool this year was extremely competitive:  315 applications for only 6 slots.  Reading through all these files, I was struck by how many smart and dedicated philosophers there are. I enjoyed reading the insightful and creative writing samples and the often inspiring personal statements, and I was saddened that we could not admit more.  I know this doesn't really help, but I will mention it nevertheless.

Thank you for applying to our program.

Best wishes,

Ted Sider

PS:  Sorry for the impersonal note.  I wish I could email each person individually, but this just isn't practical given the number of applicants.

Edited February 24, 2015 by ianfaircloud

[psm1580b]

AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE BELOW POST, I HAVE ELECTED TO DELETE MY ORIGINAL POST.

 

Good point.

Edited February 25, 2015 by psm1580b

[Sigaba]

I think that this thread is ill considered, even self destructive.

 

What kind of statement are each of you making about your trustworthiness and judgement by posting letters with identifying information on the internet? (Did Professors Sider and Zollman give each of you their consent to post their private correspondence on the internet?)

 

Would it be terribly difficult for a member of a graduate admissions committee or a department administrator to use the information in your profiles to figure out who each of you are? (Yes, they do come to the GradCafe and lurk.)

[ianfaircloud]

I think that this thread is ill considered, even self destructive.

 

What kind of statement are each of you making about your trustworthiness and judgement by posting letters with identifying information on the internet? (Did Professors Sider and Zollman give each of you their consent to post their private correspondence on the internet?)

 

Would it be terribly difficult for a member of a graduate admissions committee or a department administrator to use the information in your profiles to figure out who each of you are? (Yes, they do come to the GradCafe and lurk.)

 

Wow, I'm very surprised at this reaction. Self-destructive? Professors lurking on GradCafe? The correspondence is hardly personal or private; these are letters written often to hundreds of people (quite literally). Not one of these emails is personal; indeed, if one were personal, I would *not* recommend posting it! (Unless you think that a letter with your name is "personal." But that's not "personal" in any ordinary sense of the word.)

 

Please, readers of this post: don't post anything that you think of as "personal." I think of none of the above letters as the least bit personal. They are carefully crafted with the knowledge that many others will read them. I forwarded them along to faculty and friends, and I feel no shame in that. Others feel the same way. In fact, many others have posted their letters on Grad Cafe in the past. This is merely an effort to put them in one place.

 

Sigaba, I see that you're uncomfortable with this. I respect that, but I disagree that I'm not trustworthy on account of posting a rejection letter that hundreds, literally hundreds of people have seen. You know how many people have posted pieces of letters on Grad Cafe, either on this forum or in the "results" survey page? I must have read literally hundreds of quotes from such letters.

 

Edit: I don't want to sound too dismissive of Sigaba. Reasonable minds may differ on this. I just really resent the suggestion that people who post letters are not trustworthy on account of that! I thought this thread might be interesting to people. Many of us have received interesting letters in response to our applications. Many of us are curious about those.

Edited February 25, 2015 by ianfaircloud

[Griswald]

I think that an attempt to provide valuable information to those participating in this otherwise opaque and sometimes alienating process shows a good deal of integrity and sound judgment.

[Duns Eith]

IanFaircloud: I understand where you are coming from.

 

I think the funding thread/spreadsheet that people were adding to was helpful, and anonymous (in that it is not tied to any user). In the same way, of course, the GradCafe results page is extremely helpful and anonymous. I think it is probably a good idea to keep the details of the package given to you (and the manner it was communicated) more confidential.

 

I am unsure about whether we should consider the emails from the AdComms as private correspondance given in confidence.

 

In any case, I think it would be better if this were made available (yes! this is extremely helpful!) but more or less anonymous. I realize there is a sense of pride and congratulatory glory, but is it appropriate? Not sure.

 

... I am thinking by analogy, what if someone posted a picture of themselves next to their employment acceptance email (along with the salary), posted on a public help-wanted board (next to an ad for the position offered). I'd think douche. But there are some disanalogous aspects in GradCafe's situation that would not make me think "Douche."

Edited February 25, 2015 by Turretin

[ianfaircloud]

... I am thinking by analogy, what if someone posted a picture of themselves next to their employment acceptance email (along with the salary), posted on a public help-wanted board (next to an ad for the position offered). I'd think douche. But there are some disanalogous aspects in GradCafe's situation that would not make me think "Douche."

 

You've brought up a different criticism than the one offered by the poster above.

 

Some people do post quotes from letters or whole letters in order to self-promote. Many of us are pretty anonymous on this site, so our reputations don't extend at all beyond this forum. There are only a few people on this forum who know my real name.

 

It sounds like your real worry is that some people may be brought down by reading another person's admission letter (hence your mention of a posting on a public help-wanted board next to an ad for the position offered).

 

You know, it's true that much of what we say and do on Grad Cafe may bring down someone in a vulnerable position. A lot of people avoid Grad Cafe altogether because they're worried about the psychological effects (perhaps including the effect of watching others do well). I'm not sure what that means for those of us who do participate in the forum. Maybe it means that we should be sensitive and understanding.

 

I aim to be sensitive. I hope that people don't post letters in order to self-promote. I also hope that people who might be hurt by seeing others' letters would not visit this thread. 

 

(I'll point out that people post quotes and letters of admission on various threads of this forum all of the time. The responses are overwhelmingly positive. This is largely a group of people who aren't first and foremost self-promoting; the people on this forum are other-promoting. When we see one among us do well, we congratulate the person and try to share the joy. I'm not saying that there's a "right" way that one should feel after seeing someone else do well. When I see someone do well, I'm sure deep inside there's a part of me that feels some regret that I didn't get admitted to a program last year. That's a completely normal reaction. When I see someone do well, I extend my congratulations-- unless the person is a jerk or something. I don't think of those people as doing anything analogous to what you offered above, regarding the post on the help-wanted board next to an advertisement for the position. I'm speaking in generalities; of course, some people are here to self-promote. But by and large, the people on here genuinely want to see others do well. I don't want to call your analogy ridiculous or out of touch with the culture of this forum. I can see why you have the worry that you do. From my perspective, it's not a real serious worry in this context. The people who are pretty worried about how they may feel about someone's admission offer-- those people are avoiding this place. I totally get that and respect it.)

[Duns Eith]

You are correct that the overall healthy aspect of our community is that when we post letters, it is usually met with encouragement, praise, and congratulation. I like that interaction, to be honest.

 

Though I will say that when I saw someone post (in a different sub-forum) their letter nearly verbatim, I was taken aback. I thought it was poor form.

 

[unrelated: You're in Philly? I am just north of Philly, about 2 miles of the northern border of Philly proper, in Abington Twp]

Edited February 25, 2015 by Turretin

[alopachuca]

Edit: I don't want to sound too dismissive of Sigaba. Reasonable minds may differ on this. I just really resent the suggestion that people who post letters are not trustworthy on account of that! I thought this thread might be interesting to people. Many of us have received interesting letters in response to our applications. Many of us are curious about those.

 

My personal view on this, by all means be dismissive. The comment by Sigaba is ridiculous, considering that (like you've already said) there's hardly anything private about these letters. If any of them did contain sensitive information (they don't), I trust that everyone here would have the good judgment to omit that information.

 

Some people are so soft.

[Eigen]

I'll just add to Sigaba's sentiment, and say that I think posting an offer letter publicly, whether for a school or a job, is bad form, and generally considered to be publicly positing private information. Generally, while not legally protected, job offers (and graduate acceptance/funding offers) are considered confidential. You can show people, but broadcasting them too widely can seem unprofessional. 

[a_for_aporia]

I kinda like how this thread has become solely a place to discuss whether it's right or wrong to post the letters, as opposed to a place where we actually post the letters. 

[Sigaba]

 The comment by Sigaba is ridiculous, considering that (like you've already said) there's hardly anything private about these letters.

 

My comment is based upon my experiences in the private sector and in the Ivory Tower. I've had bosses and professors and administrators tell me things in confidence even though in some instances the information was not necessarily unknown. Similarly, I've been briefed on highly qualified people not getting jobs because hiring authorities were not comfortable with candidates' abilities to mind their p's and q's or to otherwise conduct themselves in a professional manner.

 

In the event you still find my POV "ridiculous" or consider yourself "hard"   send the link to this thread to people higher up in the food chain and ask for their thoughts. 

[alopachuca]

My comment is based upon my experiences in the private sector and in the Ivory Tower. I've had bosses and professors and administrators tell me things in confidence even though in some instances the information was not necessarily unknown. Similarly, I've been briefed on highly qualified people not getting jobs because hiring authorities were not comfortable with candidates' abilities to mind their p's and q's or to otherwise conduct themselves in a professional manner.

 

In the event you still find my POV "ridiculous" or consider yourself "hard"   send the link to this thread to people higher up in the food chain and ask for their thoughts. 

 

 

In regards to the question of whether posting the letters is somehow unprofessional, wrong, or an invasion of privacy: I don't need to share your professional trajectory to answer this question. The letters are fairly standard and generic, tailored only in the sense that they'll have to be sent to a broad audience. In the odd occasion that they do contain sensitive information, people should definitely omit it. I don't doubt that candidates sometimes do things that put their trustworthiness in question but I don't think posting generic letters on gradcafe calls anyone's trustworthiness into question. 

 

In regards to the descriptive claims you make about your experiences, fair enough. In this case I don't think anyone should feel their privacy has been compromised, but perhaps a few people would. 

 

Also, I don't buy that adcoms lurk gradcafe (not that it would matter to me). Professors have admitted they don't even give a consistently close reading to the entire writing sample, which is the most important part of an application. So I'm having trouble believing they'd borrow from that time to browse the forums. 

Edited March 1, 2015 by alopachuca

[Cecinestpasunphilosophe]

In regards to the question of whether posting the letters is somehow unprofessional, wrong, or an invasion of privacy: I don't need to share your professional trajectory to answer this question. The letters are fairly standard and generic, tailored only in the sense that they'll have to be sent to a broad audience. In the odd occasion that they do contain sensitive information, people should definitely omit it. I don't doubt that candidates sometimes do things that put their trustworthiness in question but I don't think posting generic letters on gradcafe calls anyone's trustworthiness into question. 

 

In regards to the descriptive claims you make about your experiences, fair enough. In this case I don't think anyone should feel their privacy has been compromised, but perhaps a few people would. 

 

Also, I don't buy that adcoms lurk gradcafe (not that it would matter to me). Professors have admitted they don't even give a consistently close reading to the entire writing sample, which is the most important part of an application. So I'm having trouble believing they'd borrow from that time to browse the forums. 

But just in case: If you're reading this, Ted, that really was a nice rejection letter! 

[ianfaircloud]

I'll just add to Sigaba's sentiment, and say that I think posting an offer letter publicly, whether for a school or a job, is bad form, and generally considered to be publicly positing private information. Generally, while not legally protected, job offers (and graduate acceptance/funding offers) are considered confidential. You can show people, but broadcasting them too widely can seem unprofessional. 

 

Moderator, are you offering this in an official capacity or as just another person on Grad Cafe? Your position as "moderator" suggests the former. I wonder what others think about you offering your view as a moderator on this topic.

 

Moderator, you say that it's "bad form," "considered confidential" (by whom? aren't you begging the question here?), and can "seem unprofessional" (by whom? why?).

 

I find the post frustrating. It comes off to me as condescending, because you offered it with the words "Moderator" and "Staff" next to your name, and because you offered a merely-conclusory opinion.

 

I've already offered a fairly comprehensive defense of my view, and others have chimed in (most of them for, but a few against, my view).

 

I'll add the following: It's fairly standard practice (the social norm) in law admissions to post letters and other communication. Is there a relevant difference in law admissions, or do you think that all of those people (the thousands of them) are in the wrong for doing it? If there's a relevant difference, what difference could that be? The letters are written by people at the law school. They are form letters, not personalized beyond the salutation. To be clear, no one has suggested that we should post letters that are not form letters. (See the posts above.) Law and philosophy letters alike are often (though not always) emailed. So what's the crucial difference? Is it that a professor's communication is more private than communication from another officer of the school? If so, what's the relevant difference between a professor's letter and one from an admissions officer? Is it that one letter is viewed by more people? Is there some point at which the letter becomes private?

Edited March 1, 2015 by ianfaircloud

[Eigen]

You've only posted wait list/rejections so far, but I have yet to experience a school that writes bulk acceptance letters, which are what I'm talking about. Sigaba may be referring to all of the above. Many acceptance letters are quasi-form letters, with some generic bits and some specific to your offer.

It's usually the finding information that's considered confidential, the same as job offer letters. It's considered confidential, as it was written to you, and different people may receive different funding amounts.

Law school admissions is a completely different animal, and law admission is not synonymous with a job offer.

As to posting thus while a moderator.... I'm usually quite clear when something is violating the forum rules. Else, I'm quite clear that it's my opinion or perspective, as in this case.

That said, it's probably a good time for a reminder that all posts here are permanent, and once you post it, you can't just have it taken down.

As to ”by whom", since the sentence started with generally, it was intended as a general statement. But I was thinking of admissions committees and other university individuals.

[philstudent1991]

I don't see any confidentiality breach here. There is no identifying info, the generic email goes out to hundreds of people, and there is no privileged information on offer in the emails. However, I'm not sure what work showing these emails does that compiling the funding details elsewhere does not do. I think the funding details project is awesome and I will be consulting it extensively when I apply out. But the letters are not as helpful to me, if they are helpful at all. But it's totally baseless to jump on Ian as not trustworthy. Ian has contributed more valuable information and insight to this forum than anyone else. 

[ianfaircloud]

You've only posted wait list/rejections so far, but I have yet to experience a school that writes bulk acceptance letters, which are what I'm talking about. Sigaba may be referring to all of the above. Many acceptance letters are quasi-form letters, with some generic bits and some specific to your offer.

It's usually the finding information that's considered confidential, the same as job offer letters. It's considered confidential, as it was written to you, and different people may receive different funding amounts.

Law school admissions is a completely different animal, and law admission is not synonymous with a job offer.

As to posting thus while a moderator.... I'm usually quite clear when something is violating the forum rules. Else, I'm quite clear that it's my opinion or perspective, as in this case.

That said, it's probably a good time for a reminder that all posts here are permanent, and once you post it, you can't just have it taken down.

As to ”by whom", since the sentence started with generally, it was intended as a general statement. But I was thinking of admissions committees and other university individuals.

 

You imply that the "bulk" nature of some letters is relevant. I assume by "bulk" you mean "form letter." We've said in this thread that we're speaking about form letters. See, e.g., my second post, above. If you're speaking about something other than a form letter, then you're not speaking to the issue.

 

Regarding form letters, you write that you "have yet to experience a school that writes bulk acceptance letters." I have experienced several departments that offer such letters, if by "bulk" you mean "form letter." Form letters are quite common in admission offers! Sometimes grad admission chairs (at least in philosophy) don't have time to pen a personal admission letter. When I applied and was admitted to MA programs, I received several (five?) such form letters from faculty members of a philosophy department.

 

You write regarding funding information that "it's considered confidential" by "admissions committees and other university officials." Thankfully, that's simply not true of philosophy admissions. We need openness about funding so that we can make informed decisions about whether to accept an offer. Openness about offers decreases the chance that an uninformed person is exploited. Openness also encourages departments to give fair compensation. Funding is not a gift. It's a contract. In the case of a job offer, I would think openness is particularly important!

 

I've received a lot of positive feedback for the funding information that we have posted in the funding survey. In two years of posting this information, no one has offered on this forum or via email a worry that the information is private or confidential. You're the first to offer that particular worry, Moderator.

 

So, in sum, two things you say above strike me as incredible: One is that you've never seen form letters in admission letters. I personally have received several of these, and I know many others who have. Two is that you think funding information is supposed to be kept in strict confidence (though you admit in your first post that "You can show people," just don't "broadcast" the information).

[Eigen]

Is there any particular reason you keep addressing me as "moderator" rather than my actual user name?

[flybottle]

Is there any particular reason you keep addressing me as "moderator" rather than my actual user name?

 

Is the rhetorical ploy really that obscure to you, or are yours just that heavy-handed?

[ianfaircloud]

Of course not, Eigen. I guess I've seen (in other forums) people refer to the "moderator". You're the only moderator with whom I've interacted on this site, and I've posted 500+ times. I mean absolutely nothing personal by my reaction to your comments.

 

But as I said above, you dropped in on the discussion -- and it's the only time I've seen you here, and you happen to be a moderator -- and then suggested that we have acted unethically. (This is implied by your suggestion that the information is "considered confidential." What else could it mean to violate confidentiality? That's why several have taken issue with the suggestion that someone has been untrustworthy.)

Do you see how, in this context, your post could come off the wrong way to those you have suggested acted unethically? It's not like you're on here interacting with us all of the time, offering your views here and there. It feels like you implicitly used your status as moderator to warrant a claim about our ethics. We had 53 responses last year to our survey about funding, and we have over 20 so far this year. Maybe you just felt particularly compelled in this situation, in which case it was all unintended on your part. I mean nothing personal. I just mean to point out how your post feels to me in this context. After all, you have called into question my ethics.

Edited March 1, 2015 by ianfaircloud

[verificationist]

I'll add the following: It's fairly standard practice (the social norm) in law admissions to post letters and other communication. Is there a relevant difference in law admissions, or do you think that all of those people (the thousands of them) are in the wrong for doing it? If there's a relevant difference, what difference could that be? The letters are written by people at the law school. They are form letters, not personalized beyond the salutation. To be clear, no one has suggested that we should post letters that are not form letters. (See the posts above.) Law and philosophy letters alike are often (though not always) emailed. So what's the crucial difference? Is it that a professor's communication is more private than communication from another officer of the school? If so, what's the relevant difference between a professor's letter and one from an admissions officer? Is it that one letter is viewed by more people? Is there some point at which the letter becomes private?

 

Exactly. And no, the fact that a letter contains a job offer with a stipend doesn't suffice to make it confidential. Especially not since many departments make that information public on their websites, including the details of different funding packages they give. And even if this wasn't the case, they would need you to sign a confidentiality agreement. Since that doesn't happen either, the only reservation I'd have about posting letters would be that leaving your name on it would be unwise. Of course, I think departments would rather you posted less rather than more information about admissions in general. But at the end of the day I doubt anyone really will care about letters in particular since we already talk about everything anyway.

 

Also, the offer letters that I've received are pretty standard. If they have something personal to say they'll usually do so in the email body. I'll post my letters on April 15. But I'll wait until then because I'm too lazy and also I don't want to talk just yet about the places I'm applying to.

 

Finally, it's all about context. It's ridiculous to think you can make general statements like that about whether to post or not certain kinds of letters. It's better simply to leave it to the personal judgement of each person to decide on individual cases. Just be professional. This thread contains a lot of pointless discussion. As they say: If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Edited March 1, 2015 by verificationist

[Eigen]

You're being far more analytical about this than I think is warranted. Sigaba and I have both been here through far too many seasons, and we've interacted with a number of different academics in different fields, especially surrounding admissions.

 

No one's telling you that you can't do anything, we're just conveying that the public posting of a letter would be, in our minds, bad form. What you (or anyone else in this thread) chooses to do with that information is entirely up to you. If you don't feel like you're breaching any confidence, then by all means post. Nothing I've said here seems to be in any way against your reccomendations, which is that nothing that's not a form letter be posted. If what I'm saying isn't at odds with your position, I'm not sure why you're being so very antagonistic, or suggesting conspiracies in the fact that I'm a moderator, and happen to be posting here. 

 

You seem to be calling into question why I would post in this thread "as a moderator" when I'm not really sure what posting "as a moderator" entails. To me, if I was posting "as a moderator", I would have made it clear that my post carried some official position, rather than positing both of my posts as my opinion, and sharing what I feel are general opinions in higher education. Hence the continued use of "generally" and "I think", etc.

[ianfaircloud]

You're being far more analytical about this than I think is warranted. Sigaba and I have both been here through far too many seasons, and we've interacted with a number of different academics in different fields, especially surrounding admissions.

 

No one's telling you that you can't do anything, we're just conveying that the public posting of a letter would be, in our minds, bad form. What you (or anyone else in this thread) chooses to do with that information is entirely up to you. If you don't feel like you're breaching any confidence, then by all means post. Nothing I've said here seems to be in any way against your reccomendations, which is that nothing that's not a form letter be posted. If what I'm saying isn't at odds with your position, I'm not sure why you're being so very antagonistic, or suggesting conspiracies in the fact that I'm a moderator, and happen to be posting here. 

 

You seem to be calling into question why I would post in this thread "as a moderator" when I'm not really sure what posting "as a moderator" entails. To me, if I was posting "as a moderator", I would have made it clear that my post carried some official position, rather than positing both of my posts as my opinion, and sharing what I feel are general opinions in higher education. Hence the continued use of "generally" and "I think", etc.

 

Eigen, no one suggested "conspiracies in the fact that [you're] a moderator." You did question our ethics, and you did that in a forum on philosophy admissions. I'm surprised that you would criticize the response as too "analytical," given that you questioned the ethics of a bunch of philosophy grad students. I've said enough on this. I'm not going to post any more replies on the subject.

[Eigen]

It feels like you implicitly used your status as moderator to warrant a claim about our ethics. We had 53 responses last year to our survey about funding, and we have over 20 so far this year. Maybe you just felt particularly compelled in this situation, in which case it was all unintended on your part. I mean nothing personal. I just mean to point out how your post feels to me in this context. After all, you have called into question my ethics.

 

Seems like you're claiming a that there's something deeper than me seeing a post, thinking it needed a response, and responding to it, in the fashion of message boards. More, you're implying that my involvement "using my status as a moderator" has something deeper (and implied to be wrong) behind it.

 

Additionally, one more time, I did not call your ethics into question. I stated an opinion on the ethics of publicly posting letters that were intended for a private audience. You've said over and over that your letters were not that. Nor did I suggest they were. But since I felt your post was likely to bring in others who might post more sensitive information, I thought a suggestion against doing so was a good idea.

 

Nor have I said anything about the funding survey being unethical. I think it's a great idea.

 

You've already said you won't respond to this, but I feel the need to post a follow up, since you're accusing me of, at best, using my status as a moderator to do something untoward, and I take offense at that. As to you not seeing me here much this year, I'm in and out, as I have been every year since 2009. I don't have as much time to read thousands of posts and reply to them as I used to.