Am I delusional? What caliber of program should I target?

[dusklife]

Originally Posted by possible_phd

I agree that the math and GMAT won't necessarily destroy his chances, because the adcoms will never look past the F's and drop outs! I'm all for being encouraging, but let's be real here. For all we know he may have the potential to be the next rock star researcher, but the spotty record does not attest to that. If you think he has a shot at the caliber programs he's mentioned above, I think "delusional" is probably the right word. I'm with oldprogrammer on this one.

...yeah, and unfortunately it's a lot "easier" and more common to drop out of a PhD program than it is an undergrad or a master's program...so when you've dropped out of those lesser programs, it's not going to look good.

I don't want to be completely discouraging either, but the top programs have absolute superstar applicants, so I think it may be a good idea to lower the amibitons in terms of targeted schools.

[clovus]

The F's because of drop outs are bad news. Only 50% of people finish a Ph.D. This is going to worry people. Do you have anything that can help them know you will finish the program?

[SpottyRecord]

I've always felt like some bizarre half breed. It seems like almost nobody has deep twin interests in philosophy and business.

Business professors can't understand my deep interest in hardcore academic philosophy (the ultimate conceptual subject), and my philosophy professors have never been able to relate to my deep interest in business.

Philosophy (in particular, Western analytic philosophy) is all about using imagination and rigorous logic to create and analyze concepts and theories. IMO this translates well to the work of a business professor. I mean, isn't that what they're really trying to do (with the further help of statistics as an analytical tool)?

It seems to me that when you look at the very cream of the crop giants of most fields, you find people with noticeable philosophical inclinations. Drucker, for example, had a bit of a philosopher in him. So there's gotta be some hope for freaks like me.

If I were to skip this fall's app period and apply next fall, what caliber of program do you folks think would be in my range? Iowa? Arizona? Colorado? Arkansas? Missouri? Perhaps schools that don't even make UTD's top 100?

[oldprogrammer]

The rigorous logic you speak of is actually not that unusual in business phd programs. That's why I emphasized proof-based, axiomatic mathematics earlier. The problem for you is that you have huge red flags. And since business phd programs rarely admit more than few applicants a year for each specialty, they have plenty of candidates without red flags to choose from. If you think your philosophy background provides you with a very unique and valuable perspective then prove it to the AdComs by doing some awesome research under a respected business professor (and finish the MBA with rockstar grades and take Calc3+LinearAlgebra+MathStats).

[possible_phd]

You assume too much. The majority of my electives and honors courses in undergrad were in philosophy (western philosophy, philosophy of religion, etc), and I was the President of a club in undergrad for people interested in philosophy and world religions. I've written countless philosophy papers and even considered philosophy for grad school at one point many moons ago. Besides, it's hard to claim that you love the rigor of philosophy when you dropped out.

I know you're trying very hard to paint yourself as a special snowflake with special circumstances, but I don't think you realize the caliber of your competition at this level. Without a doubt, you should apply to your dream schools, because you never know; however, you should also be realistic and expand your consideration set to include some schools outside the tippity top.

[oldprogrammer]

A few more comments.


Math

I looked up the Duke Strategy program, which I *think* you stated was perfect for your interests.

From their site:

It is recommended that students who have not taken a probability and statistics and/or linear algebra course in their previous academic coursework, arrange to take such a course before arriving.

Understand that the probability and statistics they speak of requires multivariable calculus. Also note that their curriculum has a Micro theory and an Econometrics course during the first semester. Between those two courses, you will be lost without those prerequisites. If you disagree, go read in the Economics forum for a while about making it through PhD Micro.



LORs

Your letter writer might say you're the best student ever, but keep in mind that your letter is most meaningful when it meets these criteria:

1. The AdCom is familiar with the writer (particularly their published research)
2. The letter writer is from the same field or a related field (i.e., Strategy, Business, Economics, or Math; though I'm sure a Strategy letter is more valuable to a Strategy program than a Math letter, for example)
3. The letter writer has written letters for others who *made it through* that particular program, or perhaps a similarly ranked program.
4. The letter is specifically focused on, and expresses direct knowledge of, your ability to produce Business PhD research.

Having said all that, and considering your spotty record, your best bet might be to apply to programs that have *some* connection to your letter writers. I'm not saying that will make the difference, but it might help your luck a little bit. Your best source of information on this will be the letter writers themselves. Make sure you ask them up front of they are comfortable *strongly* recommending you to each program you are applying to. If their response is less than enthusiastic then you should find someone else.



statement of purpose
1. Don't mention how you plan to be the next Drucker for your field. They will see this as being naive and presumptuous.
2. Don't make more than a passing reference to your work experience, perhaps only in the light that it is leading you to ask interesting questions. PhD admissions are very different from undergraduate and MBA admissions, which are often looking for diversity. PhD admissions care about one thing: is this person going to be able to contribute publishable research in this field. Your statement about combining your "been doing it" with their "been researching it" will be seen as naive and incredibly presumptuous. Find the professors you like at these programs, see what journals they publish in, and read a few of them. If those articles don't fit with what you see yourself writing then don't apply. If you don't intend to write those kinds of articles then you will likely leave the program ABD. At best, you would never attain tenure if you're not writing articles that can make it into your field's peer-reviewed journals.
3. Don't count on uniqueness alone to get you in. Take a look at the PhD profiles on Duke's (and other's websites). After perusing these for a while you should start to feel a healthy amount of insecurity.

[SpottyRecord]

Thanks oldprogrammer!

I had primarily put Duke #1 because of Dees (social entrepreneurship), Chatterji (corporate social responsibility), the center for social entrepreneurship there, and the fact that Dees and one of the other strategy guys (Fjeld) both have PhD's in Philosophy.

I didn't realize I'd have to start off taking econometrics and a micro theory class with Calc 3 as a prerequisite.

Uggh. On the bright side, math was by far my strongest subject when I was younger. On the down side, it's been ~15 years since I last completed a math course. Man, it's been ~15 years since I took bus/econ stat I & II, too. That was like 500k alcoholic beverages ago!!

Maybe I should sign up for a crazy semester at my local state university and take all of these concurrently:

Calc I
Calc II
Calc III
Linear Algebra
Intro to probability and statistics

There's so much I'd do differently if I had it to do over again...

[oldprogrammer]

Awesome, it sounds like you've put a reasonable amount of thought into the professors. That's a good start.

You won't be able to take all those courses simultaneously. I would recommend spending a little bit of time to refresh yourself on Algebra and Trig first. Then take Calc I. Do not underestimate how hard this will be if it's been 15 years. After Calc I, you could probably manage Calc II, Calc III, and Linear Algebra simultaneously, as the material is fairly independent. Though, having Calc II before Calc III will make Calc III quite a bit easier. Intro to probability and stats will require Calc III first.

Maybe something like this would be the absolute fastest:
Semester 1: Calc I
Semester 2: Calc II, Calc III
Semester 3: Stats, Linear Algebra

Again, do not underestimate how difficult these courses will be and how demanding of your time they are. Considering your academic history as a whole, anything less than a 3.5 on these courses would probably keep you out of the programs, especially if you're not taking these at a well-respected program. So don't try to overdo it and end up getting bad grades or having to drop any of these.

Use this time to also get involved in research.

[SpottyRecord]

Originally Posted by oldprogrammer

Semester 1: Calc I
Semester 2: Calc II, Calc III
Semester 3: Stats, Linear Algebra

If I did it that way, I do think I'd go ahead and work through College Algebra and Trig during that first semester, like you mention (probably just independently working through the books).

If Semester 1 = Spring 2010, this would put me on pace to enter a PhD program in Fall 2011.

I'd have to stay in my current MBA program full time and take 4 classes per semester till Fall 2011 to complete it by then, but I don't think I'd be able to do so if I'm piling all those math courses on (and especially not if trying to help some professors with their research, too).