Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

Bad admissions behavior by a philosophy graduate program

Brian Leiter

MOVING TO FRONT FROM APRIL 22, 2016–I HOPE WE WON'T SEE REPEATS OF THIS BAD BEHAVIOR THIS YEAR!

A prospective graduate student asked me to share her, shall we say, "unusual" experience during the recently concluded admissions cycle.   Here's how it started (prior to April 15):

I am a prospective graduate student currently considering offers for the following academic year. It has come to my attention that, in an attempt to gage the interest of wait listed students, some institutions may be inadvertently violating the rules set out by the APA — that students should have until April 15th to accept or reject financial offers. On your blog, you have encouraged prospective students to report these violations. I have sent a brief sketch of this situation to the APA, and I thought it could be helpful to discuss this in the philosophical community. 

I experienced the following scenario this afternoon: I am wait listed at a highly ranked institution. The GDS called me and asked, "If I were to give you an offer right now, would you accept it?" I felt strongly that if I were to say yes, an offer would be given to me instantly, and I would be bound to accept it (on April 11th). However, this institution is not my first choice, and as a result I was put into the awkward position of rejecting what I perceived to be a conditional offer, the condition being my immediate acceptance. I would still like an offer from this institution, but I would also like the courtesy afforded to me by the APA, which is to have until the end of the 15th to decide. I am on other wait lists, and wish to see how that comes out before making a final decision. However, I worry that I may have lost out on an offer that would have been mine as a result of this exchange.

I think that this experience should perhaps encourage the APA to investigate this notion of a verbal offer—or the promise of one—conditioned on acceptance prior to April 15th. Does this seem to you as it does to me to be against the rules? Or do you think I'm reading too much into a DGS' attempt to gage interest in my likelihood of acceptance?

I think this kind of conditional offer violates the APA rules.  It's one thing to ask a candidate about their level of interest, it's another to frame an inquiry as reported here.  In the end, the student went elsewhere, but with yet another wrinkle:  

Interestingly, before I declined, they placed me in yet another cart-before-the-horse situation. This program guarantees a semester of fellowship and I had been told so on multiple occasions. However, they provided me an offer without any, and when I asked about it I was told that they had sent out more offers than fellowships, and that they would give them to those who accepted the soonest while supplies last. Perhaps this is less worrying than the earlier issue, but it still seems fishy that they would require me to sign a contract of the offer *without* a fellowship listed in order to potentially obtain said fellowship. Again, it seems rather against the spirit, if not the letter, of the APA deadline to take away previously guaranteed fellowship to those who execute their right to wait until the end of the day on April 15th. 

I sincerely hope this does not occur in the future to others. It makes this more difficult and stressful for all involved.

Indeed.

UPDATE:  J.D. Trout, a distinguished philosopher of science at Loyola University, Chicago, writes:

When I was fresh out of graduate school and on the philosophy job market, I received a call from a dean at a small rural college where I had interviewed. After exchanging pleasantries, the dean explained that they wanted to make a hiring decision soon, that they had winnowed the list down to two candidates, and that I was their top choice. He then asked, “What would you say if I were to make you an offer?” implying that I would get the real offer if I said yes to the hypothetical one. I explained that I still didn’t know; he hadn’t made me an actual offer. I told him that I would think differently about the attractions of a job if I had an actual rather than an imaginary offer. At the time, I think I was mainly interested in letting the dean know that I recognized his question as a low-rent hustle; they didn’t want to waste time on a candidate’s offer that might not be accepted (potentially losing their other candidate in the process). The dean made an actual offer and told me I had four days to decide. I took another job.

I'm opening comments, since I'm now back in town.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

13 responses to “Bad admissions behavior by a philosophy graduate program”

  1. Anonymous

    In 1992, when I was in the first of what would be three temporary jobs between getting my PhD and landing a tenure-track position, I had an on-campus interview at a pretty good private university on the east coast. This was huge for me, since by that time I could have papered my walls with TT-job rejection letters. It was really looking as though I would have to leave the profession, and I had no idea what else I would do. The visit went very well, and I seemed to have particularly hit it off with their then star philosopher, who was a Brit like me. My sister was visiting and he took us out to dinner; I learned later that he was continuously hitting on my her when I wasn’t around.

    A few days later the chair of their search committee called me to ask whether I would accept their department’s recommendation of an offer. This was not legally an offer, he said, but he had never known it not to be translated into one by their administration if it was accepted; it essentially amounted to an offer. I would run a mile from such an overture today, but at the time, unlike Prof Trout, I was embarrassingly gullible even for my age, and took what he said at face value. I was actually overjoyed. Their ‘offer’ letter arrived and I immediately replied affirmatively. I was in frequent contact with their search committee chair over the next few weeks. We discussed such matters as where to look for accommodation in the city in question and arrangements for my partner to take courses at the university.

    Then suddenly I was told there was a hitch. Someone had made a complaint, he said, about the conduct of the search. He couldn’t be more specific, but for the time being the search had been ‘suspended’, pending some kind of inquiry by their affirmative action office. Naturally I was extremely dismayed; but he emphasized that the process of hiring me had been held up, not derailed. He would let me know as soon as this obstacle had been overcome.

    So I waited. And waited. I heard nothing for weeks. I’m not sure now why I didn’t pester the search committee chair; perhaps I didn’t want to ‘jinx it’ or make a bad impression. Anyway, eventually I called the British Lothario, to inquire unofficially into the progress of the inquiry. How did it look? I asked. What were my chances? He was incredulous. ‘What? Look, there’s no chance of you getting this job. It’s all over.’

    Reply
  2. anon2

    Without downplaying the effects on candidates of "hardball" recruitment tactics like this, I think it's useful to think about why departments might be using them. My guess is that departments are trying to prevent three negative outcomes: (1) if the first candidate turns down an offer, the dean won't let the department make a second offer; (2) if the department gets in a bidding war, the dean will not buck up to match (add to this: many deans now require an offer to be in writing before they will respond with a counter); and (3) if the department successfully "wins" a bidding war, the dean will take the extra cost of the hire out of the department's hide in some other way. In other words, departments are responding to the new reality of higher education: lower shares of budgets going into hiring tenure-line faculty, less departmental autonomy over budgets, less respect for faculty self-governance, and a growing corporate/bottom-line orientation among administrators.

    Not trying to excuse the bad behavior, just trying to understand why it occurs.

    Reply
  3. Henry

    I am an editor, and I frequently encounter an error that anon2 makes in his or her comment above. That is to put metaphors and idioms in quotation marks, as anon2 does with "hardball." I presume that the writer's purpose is to let the reader know that the writer is not referring to baseball. But we know that from the context, and quotation marks are not appropriate. We use words non-literally all the time. Anon2 uses "bidding war" and "department's hide," and means neither "war" nor "hide" literally, and, fortunately, does not place them in quotation marks. I don't mean to pick on anon2; I see this all the time, and it drives me crazy!

    BL COMMENT: I took the quotation marks differently: I think the writer's point was to acknowledge that calling this "hardball" tactics might seem a bit melodramatic, so the writer wants to show awareness of that.

    Reply
  4. Anon PhD

    Back to the topic of bad behavior by graduate admissions committees.

    In 2001, I had two outstanding offers with no pressure whatsoever. However, a third offer came in, in the form of a phone call. I was asked if given a fellowship and TAship for four years, would I be interested in coming to their school? I responded that I had two outstanding offers and would definitely consider their offer, once I had a hard copy of it. Mind you, I had a thirty minute conversation with this person, who would have been my advisor. He was very supportive of what I wanted to work on. April 15th came and no offer, never heard from that school again…not even a rejection letter. The point is, this happens more than many want to admit.

    Reply
  5. Derek Bowman

    I'm not sure I understand anon2's comment. Of course departments have incentives to pressure prospective grad students to accept an offer of admission. That's why there's a rule, right?

    Reply
  6. M

    This is bad behavior by the grad program. While giving applicants until April 15 is a good thing, the result of it is that there is a mad scramble on April 15. A student who is holding an offer and who is screwing around making up his or her mind, or, even worse, just hasn't informed the departments that he or she has not selected that he or she wishes to decline the offer, makes a lot of trouble near the end of the admissions sorting process. So I know why these departments are engaging in this bad behavior.

    Philosophy could take a hint from the way that medical residencies get sorted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Resident_Matching_Program

    Reply
  7. Daniel Kaufman

    I know personally of a grad school applicant *this year* who (a) was accepted to a program; (b) was invited to visit the campus and visited said campus; (c) was informed afterwards that his acceptance was "in error" and that it was rescinded.

    Reply
  8. peter

    It was the practice at the UK Russell Group university where I worked to end job interviews with the question:

    "If we were to make you an offer would you accept it?"

    I had several temporary posts there before the permanent one, so I applied and was interviewed (and appointed) three times. Each time I was asked this question, I answered:

    "If you were to make me an offer and if I found it acceptable and if I had no better offer, then I would accept it."

    Reply
  9. Joel Velasco

    In the 2009-2010 job season, I had interviews with two British schools. Both did the one (or two) day job search process with all of the candidates at the same time. Both included a final interview with some philosophers and some non-philosophers and both interviews (and thus the entire search process) ended with "If we offered you this job right now would you take it?" This is a very awkward question no matter your situation, but especially in my case because I would have loved to take a job at either of these schools and certainly didn't want to do anything to hurt my chances, however, the truth is neither was my first choice and I not yet even had my campus visit to the school that was my first choice. So I was loathe to accept a job right then if it was offered (not to mention there was all sorts of international things to sort out if I did get an offer). All I could say was that I was very excited about the position, but that I did also have other interviews and I would have to see what other offers I might have and talk to my family before accepting the offer. But unlike some other commentators on this thread, I did not think this was in any way pressuring me. I took it (and basically the entire interview) as a pretty much pro-forma interview with all (or most) of the questions pre-determined and asked to all of the candidates including the last one. I did have one sympathetic philosopher in one case tell me afterwards "that was a fine answer, perfectly reasonable" or something similar which I took to try to signal "don't worry, you didn't ruin your chances or anything" and I also took it to partially confirm my thoughts that this question was not put specifically to me. My answer may not have helped, but I doubt that I was their first choice in either case anyway.
    I guess now, years later, I am curious to know whether in fact this question is asked of everybody and what they do with the answer (if someone is really excited and says, "yes of course! This is my dream job!" does it actually help? I was afraid to say that since if they did follow up with "okay, great, we are offering you a job, I would have had to follow up with "great, can I have a while to decide?" which would have been pretty awkward.
    I doubt that a thread in Leiter will have a big effect on British hiring practices when the departments themselves don't often have a lot of choice in the matter, but I will add my two cents anyway and say that I really dislike this question and if I was at the school and interviewing other candidates, I would be embarrassed to ask it and put the candidates in this awkward situation. On the face of it, it encourages lying which leads to problems and the possible good you can get out of it (learning how excited a candidate is about a position, possibly learning what other offers they might have, how fast they would decide, etc.) is pretty precarious, unreliable, and possible immoral information to be taken into account in hiring anyway.

    Reply
  10. On the market

    For what it is worth, given that questions like "If we were to make you an offer would you accept it?" seem to me to be unacceptable, I would think it morally appropriate to answer "Yes, I would," without regard to what the truth of the matter is. And I would in no way hold it against someone if they did so answer and then ultimately turned down a forthcoming offer for a better offer. "I thought I would, but circumstances have changed" seems to me an entirely sufficient explanation, even in cases where the changed circumstances are e.g. the new presence of a sweeter offer from another department.

    Reply
  11. Mohan Matthen

    These stories of bad behaviour make me wonder. Can't you treat a contract as non-binding if it is against the rules? What if you simply accepted a tainted offer of this sort, with every display of enthusiasm and delight, but didn't think of it as binding? If another offer comes along before April 15th from a school you prefer, tell the first school you've changed your mind. If they get upset, just say: "Oh, I thought these offers and responses were open until April 15th. I didn't mean my acceptance to be final. Did you take it that way?"

    Reply
  12. Phil Prof

    My experience applying to grad school in '95 perhaps bears sharing. I had a rather mixed academic record as an undergraduate at UCLA (an improving but not spectacular G.P.A but a very high GRE score). Given this fact and also that I had reduced studies in my last year before the application deadline, I thought it prudent to apply to numerous PhD programs (only a few of which would now be considered "top ten" programs) that matched my interests since many would predictably decline my admission. The results: 7 declined me outright, 7 accepted me but only with the "potential" for scholarships and 7 accepted me with a promise of full fellowships for the duration of a 5 year PhD study (only one acceptance, from an Ivy League school, might be considered a "top ten" philosophy program although the gourmet report was barely in its infancy at the time if I recall correctly). One department chair (and only one) from a not so prestigious program actually pursued me (at least in terms of calling me on more than one occasion in the days before email). Although flattered, I assumed that was his M.O. and it doesn't surprise me in the least given his energy and enthusiasm that this department is now considered a very good one more recently. However, after a brief consideration, I accepted that earlier offer from the Ivy League institution by mail in April. However, and this is the main part, I received a letter a couple of weeks later that they had made a mistake in making too many acceptances (it wasn't clear from their letter whether too many accepted their offer or they just sent the acceptances out as a mistake). Instead they "adjusted" their offer to accept me into the program but with only a potential for a fellowship in subsequent years. Knowing (as hopefully most here do) that going into any substantial debt to get a humanities PhD is probably a very bad idea, I accepted an offer from another program which was not a "top ten" program but was fully funded (and matched my interests best of the remaining 6 schools that gave me a full ride). I then at the last minute on April 15th (Be warned!) got a phone call offer from a top ten program which also asked me if I had accepted any offer from anyone else. I truthfully said I had and so they promptly said that any acceptances were binding and expeditiously tried to get off the phone, I assume to call other applicants. I remember as someone in my early 20s not really knowing for sure whether I had made the right choice in being so honest given that the program that called me at the last minute was one of my very top choices being very close to my home town near my parents who were not in the best of health, plus the school had a great reputation and had scholars with mutual interests (but which I was obviously not their first choice). However, I recalled being rather disappointed in how the earlier program had rescinded their offer so perhaps I thought it good that I, at least, took the high ground. No regrets about my action now but the scholar I wanted to study under at the program I ended up going to passed away within a few months after I went there! My graduate school years were a challenging ride but I'm glad there is more information online now then there was at the time on how to handle the application process (whether for accepting admissions or job offers). Truly we (undergraduates at least) were in the dark ages up until the late 90s. My story had a happy ending in academia despite the rough start and I hope this recalled experience helps others going through the process make their own choices in an informed way.

    Reply
  13. Anon applicant

    Many departments are yet to send letters offering/denying admission – Alberta, Binghamton..

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

    Reply

Designed with WordPress