Pol

U de M is imo. the best place as far as Canadian politics go, the downside being that the coursework is in French.

They're not strict, it's a recommendation. "SSHRC strongly suggests [...]" "You may work as a research assistant (receiving an hourly wage)." http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/using-utiliser/guide-A/regulations-reglements-eng.aspx

I think your next step is to figure out exactly whom you'd like to work with.

Apply. I personally have a quite miserable undergraduate gpa and still got a cgs-m two years ago and a cgs-d a few weeks ago.

I'm assuming it was half of the yearly amount that was transferred (10K). Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

No claw-back here.

Mine were consistent to some extent but it just shows the randomness involved and the importance of uncontrollable factors such as the members composing the juries and their preferences. Fellowships are a lottery imo.

Btw, Quebec applicants, today was news day for the FRQSC. This seasons was a home-run

I think they mention somewhere in the guidelines that they subtract 12 months from the calculations in those cases. Meaning they evaluated you as if you were in your second and not third year.

I wouldn't hold my breath but you might get bumped to an A during the summer. I know of somebody with barely a few decimals over you with an A (same subcommittee, same field). If a few (?) people downgrade from A to B to go international that is.

I wouldn't verse into dichotomous interpretations. I'm aware of at least one cgs-d recipient whose proposal was extremely weak but had one publication.

Thanks! I'm a 4.5 hours drive away from Ottawa give or take a few minutes.

CGS-D baby.

Calm down.

As if opening my mail box wasn't already stressful enough.

Right now is the perfect time to read your research proposal and find every single flaw in it, trust me. (Don't)

Back in my days the CGS-M was tied to you, not darn schools!

I'm usually down for just about anything, Smallworld, Lords of Waterdeep, Pandemic, 7 wonders, Dixit, Tokaido, Love Letter, Dominion, Resistance, Catan, Ticket to Ride, etc. The only games I systematically refuse to play are Risk and Monopoly.

Why? PhDs get all the chicks.

You guys are all way to excited

Wine and poor life choices.

The NES has only 2Kb of RAM plus whatever was on your political-quant-research game cartridge. I bet your laptop has a hard time keeping track of all its Nature/Science publications.

OMG an A in undergrad stats? Wow. You know all there is to know about quant and research. On a serious note, what we're telling you is to stop being so narrow minded. As it was rightfully pointed out you need to know the tools before discarding them. Comparing a whole range of approaches (qual) to the misuse of single model is inadequate. An adequate comparison would be somebody saying you can't use any form of modelling as it can't be used for causal inference.

Because pointing out a model is misspecified is the same as saying qualitative research can't achieve causal inference. Right.

Well I mean, you're probably aware of Political Analysis 2006 symposium special issue; the whole Brady, Collier, Seawright VS Beck, Benett on the topic of causal inference. Or, to a lesser extent, KKV pushing a "quant mindset" on qualitative research and RSI pretty much saying "that's not how we operate". (I'm operating from memory here, slightly caricaturing) Quants claiming causal inference can't be achieved through qualitative research does happen. On the other hand, I'm in Canada and what kaykaykay is saying echoes my experience.