Brian Leiter's Ranking of Graduate Programs in Philosophy in the English-Speaking World

Selected Feedback 2001-02   “Thanks once again for your service to the profession. I wish the Gourmet had been available when I was applying to grad schools. Your report is the first place I send undergraduates who express an interest in graduate study.” --a philosopher at a university with an unranked PhD program (October 3, 2001)   “Thanks for the new Report which I think admirably accomplishes its stated purpose: providing a powerful supplementary tool for prospective grad students.” --a philosopher at a ranked PhD program (October 3, 2001)   “Let me thank you for producing this marvelously useful (if, of course, interestingly contentious) report! I’ve been trying to help a friend of mine pick a PhD program in linguistics recently, and the paucity of any analogous documents is striking.” --an untenured philosopher at a ranked PhD program (October 3, 2001)   “The report…makes fascinating and irresistible reading….I admire your hard work—much appreciated without doubt round the philosophical world.” --a philosopher at a ranked program in the UK (October 4, 2001)   “Thanks for continuing to produce your very informative report. Not only do I (as undergraduate advisor) insist that any students contemplating graduate school read it, but I find it useful myself for keeping abreast of developments in the field.” --an untenured philosopher at a ranked PhD program (who wrote with suggestions for more fine-grained specialty rankings) (October 4, 2001)   “I have accompanied your Gourmet since its first [on-line] edition and, as a Brazilian Master student in Philosophy, I have to confess: it is impossible to stress enough how it has been important to me. Thank you a lot!!!” --(October 6, 2001)   “Despite the fact that [my department] seems not to fare very well in the report, I do still think that the philosophical community owes you a huge debt of gratitude.” --a philosophy graduate student at a ranked PhD program (October 11, 2001)   “Well done with the PGR. I know that many philosophers, while reading it compulsively, say it is an evil thing that should be abolished. Not me.” --a philosophy graduate student at Princeton (October 16, 2001)   “I read much of the stuff on your webpage about the [criticisms of the Report]. I enjoyed your replies, which were uncommonly clear-headed at cutting through layers of misleading and self-serving rubbish. If I started to give my own opinions on points of detail I would be at it all week, and so I better not get started. (I have too many other things to do this week to waste a few days on an uncontrolled rant about self-deceived philosophers and ingrown departments with delusions of grandeur. One valuable subsidiary service of the report is that it provides a brake on the maintenance of those illusions.) But I did want to add my voice to say that I think you are doing the profession a service and I appreciate your efforts, especially since you began to guide the rankings by your surveys. (I had some reservations before that.)” --a philosopher at a top-ranked PhD program (January 14, 2002)   “I just want to give you a word of support for your excellent gourmet report, especially in light of the recent [criticisms of] it. Fact is, you’re the best source out there for prospective grad students, bar none. The funny thing about these [critics] is that they don’t provide an alternative solution—they just give lip service. All the new and current students in my department (an extremely well-reputed one in Canada) appreciate the gourmet report.” --an undergraduate at a top university in Canada (January 17, 2002)   “I certainly hope that you keep producing the Phil. Gourmet…I think it’s great.” --a philosopher at an unranked PhD program (March 13, 2002)   “After reading the controversy over the Gourmet Report…I’d like to reiterate my support to you for your precious work….As a foreign student…I’d like to stress [in particular] the usefulness of the PGR to students from other countries, some of whom have no access to faculty trained in this country or otherwise connected with good programs, with correspondingly no information about what the good programs are and what is done in them….I [also] think rankings (taken with a grain of salt, of course) are VERY GOOD. I come from [a country in Europe]…[that] has no rankings and where people despise rankings. In [this country] the overall quality of academia (and most other institutions) is quite uniformly low. Hiring decisions are EXCLUSIVELY based on ‘old boys’ networks. My experience is that unless in a community there is some competitive spirit, and some public measure of it, the community tends to stabilize around a low level of quality. Rankings may be unpleasant, especially for big egos, but they contribute to fostering quality within a community. So in my humble opinion they are a service, not a disservice, to a community.” --a graduate student at a top-ranked PhD program (March 21, 2002)   “[M]y thanks for your tireless work on behalf of up-and-coming graduate students, in particular, and the profession, in general.” --a philosopher at a ranked PhD program (March 21, 2002)   “I appreciate your doing all of this…(There is more than one view at Harvard about the Leiter report).” --a graduate student at Harvard (March 22, 2002)   “I’d like to thank you for all your great work in disseminating invaluable information throughout the philosophical community. I was dismayed to find that some of my Harvard friends claim to resent your efforts. It is a classic illustration of the sad truth that ‘no good deed goes unpunished.’” --an untenured philosopher at a top-ranked PhD program (March 21, 2002)   “I appreciate…the Leiter report, and I have found it very useful in advising undergraduates.” --a philosopher at an unranked PhD program (April 5, 2002)   “I’m a fan of the Report, by the way. I despise its eschewers. Keep up the good work!” --a philosopher at an undergraduate institution (writing with a criticism of one of the specialty rankings) (April 10, 2002)   “Your report, opinions, and updates have been invaluable resources in deciding where to pursue an advanced degree in philosophy.” --an undergraduate (April 16, 2002)   “I think you provide a needed service and do it very well. Many in the profession should be grateful for all the work you put in.” --a philosopher at a liberal arts college (May 16, 2002)   “It would be nice if there were a place in your report reseserved for ranking philosophy journals by corresponding disciplines (in the manner that you ranked programs by discipline)….[W]hy not add it, and make your report even more thorough? It is a tremendous service, I should add, as it stands, and I am tremendously grateful that it is available.” --a graduate student at the City University of New York (May 16, 2002)   “I’m a great fan of the Gourmet Report, and appreciate it especially when working in an out-of-the-loop university while trying to keep up with the currents in the profession and in legal philosophy.” --a philosopher at a university in Canada (May 24, 2002)   “[T]hanks…for providing such a great resource. All my peers have used it and are very glad for its existence.” --a graduate student at Oxford University (May 30, 2002)   “Your site is the most useful for undergraduate students looking to enter graduate programs, or even for MA students seeking good PhD programs. What your report does, that it seems like all the others fail to, is identify the strong programs in different fields, which seems to me to be much more important than to simply have generic ‘top 10’ schools as other reports provide. So in closing, I would like to say, keep up the good work!” --from a student (June 14, 2002)   “Just when it seemed philosophy is doomed to die from apathy in the academic world, you struck a match and lit a torch. Thank you for showing your interest and guiding us students.” --from a student (June 26, 2002)   “I hope that Blackwell continues to publish the Report, as it is invaluable to undergraduate philosophy majors, such as myself, who are at a loss as to which programs are best suited for our interests and intentions. Although I may be naive enough to want to attend graduate school for the inherent value of a philosophical education, I am not so naive that I would not care which departments would offer me a better chance of getting work after graduation. The possibility of unemployment does not deter many of us who decide to study philosophy, but the PGR allows for a more informed selection between, say, choosing Harvard to study ethics or choosing Stanford to study ethics. Sure, the atmosphere at Stanford might be more conducive to learning, depending on one's disposition and/or the quality of teaching, but to know that Harvard grads typically are looked upon more favorably in this field should be something one is aware of in determining one's school of choice. And although a school's reputation for ethics or metaphysics might be well known, it is vital for those of us who have several philosophical interests or are just undecided as to what we'll emphasize on to know ALL the strengths and weaknesses of a given department. The difference between choosing school X (which is strong in epistemology) and school Y (which is strong in epistemology) might be that school Y is also notable in metaphysics or ethics. And surely no professor or advisor at an institution has the time to sit down with every prospective grad student to show (if s/he is even aware) all the information regarding these schools and to weigh out the results. I for one spent a great deal of time honing down a list of schools which I feel suit my needs. I will take this list of schools and discuss them with one or two professors, but ultimately I will make an informed decision -- a decision which will largely be a result of the Gourmet Report.” --an undergraduate at UCLA writing to Blackwell (July 29, 2002)   “I really think you did a great job on the gourmet report. It’s very comprehensive and easy to use.” --an undergraduate at the University of New Mexico (September 5, 2002)