eponine997

An announcement on gradcafe is still more/better communication than I/others have received from some schools . (sincerely) thanks for keeping us updated, i'll say again how much i appreciate you and the other faculty (and currently attending students) who have made this process slightly less painful by keeping us informed and answering questions where you can.

You CAN overcome a low GPA, but you might want to consider going into a terminal masters program, some offer funding, particularly those at non-PhD-granting institutions. The other slightly more expensive option (though perhaps less time consuming) would be to retake some of your pre-reqs for better grades. I had a friend do this, after her second application cycle failed, she got into her first choice on her third attempt. I had similar things happen with my GRE, but given that the score that got me into my terminal MA wasn't going to get me anywhere else, I had to retake it anyway. It's true that programs will use GPA and GRE for "hard cuts" but from everything else you say, once you get passed that point, you are a competitive applicant. Yes^ And you can probably gather from this forum that you are not alone in this respect. My mind has been blown by the number of people with extremely high marks and qualifications who strike out the first time, and similarly, by the level of success others have had with a second application cycle. Good luck

As of today, it looks like I'm down to that single waitlist option... rejected at all others. Though this thread has me seriously regretting not responding right away to the waitlist notification to express interest. I worried too much about annoying the DGS when he said he wouldn't have news until mid April - now I'm worried it might have hurt my chances. Waiting is killing me.

Congrats!!!! And thanks for the info! what is your field?

Specifically how? - Kalhua, mixed with starbucks bottled frappuccino (mocha), with a splash of peppermint schnapps - sorta like an After 5 except with frappuccino instead of Bailey's and served over ice rather than as a shot. Good stuff Also, Vodka-based drinks, and pole vaulting (though not at the same time). Also, still waiting on Rutgers, someone who emailed them got a response something to the effect of... "by 3/15..."

^ This. Mostly this... in fact, 1000x this. Getting a political science PhD (both the process and the outcome) will likely bring less stability to your life, not more. There are literally hundreds of unemployed PS PhDs who ARE willing to move anywhere for a job and theres no guarantee the a school in your desired geographic area will be hiring for your subfield within 5 years of you graduating. You have a law degree and an MBA, you have a greater probability of getting a middle class wage and stable job with either of those than with a PS PhD. If your heart is set on teaching, you can potentially use those to teach at a community college (particularly the MBA). Otherwise I'd recommend enrolling (now) as a post-bacc/grad student at-large at USC-Columbia or whatever PhD program is closest in their Intro PS grad seminar to a) find out if its what you REALLY want, b.) adjust to the realities of what an academic career would entail, c) develop clear research interests and determine if this is the right field for you, d) build relationships with prof who can potentially write you recommendations - because you will need to do ALL of those things before applying to a PhD program. You undergrad GPA is not the end of the world, nor is your age. But before starting down this road you might want to re-evaluate whether it would allow you to achieve your desired outcome (because there might be a better, more effective way for you to reach these goals, (secondary teaching perhaps?)). Perhaps you do want this badly enough, in which case, go for it, but recognize the potential costs, which are extremely high.

Seconded, but specifically with regard to the point about whether its worth attending if you cannot attend a top 25 program. BFB, you've mentioned how fit should ultimately be more important than rank, but to what extend?

It is not a big program. I know of people on here who have heard (claimed acceptances) - they might still be checking the Poli Sci forum, I would ask there, or email the DGS.

I wish I would have had someone PDF my SoPs after editing them, I changed things around at the last minute and managed to make silly mistakes AFTER most editing was done = stupid, at least I caught this before some of the later deadlines, but seriously, been kicking myself for months now... I wish I hadn't applied to schools that, in reality, it would be unwise to attend. The concept of a safety school is great for undergrad (or for degrees with extremely high demand) because going somewhere is (almost) always better than going no where, but the job market for academic PhDs is WAY too competitive. And I'd have felt better going through another application cycle in the hopes of getting into a program that might allow me to achieve my desired ends rather than potentially let me waste 5-7 years of my life at the end of which I'd have little chance at the job I want (I know this varies by discipline, and academic v. non-academic jobs, different people have different goals, etc. etc.). I wish I wouldn't have waited so long to start the process (trying to finish up applications WHILE writing term papers, etc is a pain). One of my recommendations was actually submitted AFTER they'd sent out their acceptance notifications - a month later I got a wait-list notice :/ That said, I am actually glad I "threw away money" on schools where I was told I had no chance. I ended up getting on a waitlist at a program ranked well above what my adviser told me was a "reasonable stretch/reach" - I wouldn't have applied there if I'd listened to him, and I will never have to wonder "what if..." about the next best program.

Roughly a month ago I finally added me number to the Do Not Call registry after getting a call from a weird area code and having my heart skip a beat thinking it was a POI with an acceptance notification (it was not). Today I got another such call, but I can't make a formal complaint because its been less than 31 days since I registered and because it was a non-profit (rather than telemarketer). Nor can I tell them to stop calling because its automated. I feel like this is an omen that the torture will never stop. Particularly since I apparently applied to the last school to notify (anyone, accept or reject) in my discipline...

Well, I guess you can ignore my question on the other thread! Congrats!!! I like this thread so much better when people are announcing good news

Based on your signature block change it looks like you got more than just "a chance," did you get in?!?!? Because that would make me happy, this forum is a lot more fun when people are getting/announcing good news

Well, I suppose its about time they acknowledged the site isn't actually about jobs...

Excellent photos! GopherGrad, I will miss you! Your insights and encouragement have been really helpful, your fellow UCSD admits are lucky to have you as a classmate

I would consider (depending on your interests and obviously whether you are a quanty type) Columbia's program in quantitative methods in social science. From another user who did the program, it sounds like they have better advising (v. an MA in PS where you would likely take a back seat to PhD students) and they set up (most) students with RA positions where they are paid through the program rather than through the PI's grant. It will ALWAYS matter how well you do in any such program but fresh letters of rec might help (and you could probably better develop those relationships in the QMSS program while still taking poli sci electives).

First, +1 on the pseudonym, love it! Second, depends LARGELY on your goals, if you looking to go more policy-oriented, think-tank route - yes they are probably comparable. But "being in DC and having money" don't necessarily correspond with good placement on the academic job market, for that look at or ask where specific schools have been placing candidates lately. If GMU has little to no placement record for PS, that is something to consider because programs looking to hire might overlook it in favor of a more known quantity. Third, I would try to interject in the current thread comparing DC-area schools, you'll probably get more action there, though it might be telling that GMU is not already part of that comparison. Finally, And I would say this of any school about which one might ask this question ("but I hear its on the rise..."), Do you want to be a guinea pig? Depending on your options, that might be what you are doing. I'm not saying "don't" as much as I'm saying "realize this." Rankings can change for a number of reasons, and while I don't necessarily have a great view over time, I can say with a fair amount of certainty that it is extremely difficult and time consuming for a school outside the top 20 to break into it. Outside of the top 20, upswings and downswings can happen periodically, though probably not very substantially (as in jumping 10 places or more in a short period) and have to do with faculty coming and going, etc. Picking a lower ranked school over a more highly ranked one hoping the former will improve might be a great idea for you if it is a better fit (beyond just one advisor) and the rankings are relatively close. The greater the distance in rankings and similarity in fit, the greater the gamble you are taking by going with the lower program assuming (or hoping) it will "rise" when it has (most likely) an equal probability of stagnation or decline. If you are choosing between a program ranked 50 and another ranked 25 - you should have a VERY GOOD reason for not going with the latter. = my .02, TIFWIW

Oh you're right, i DO remember that now. He responded to something a page or two ago (I got admitted to Harvard, Princeton and Yale... blah blah) and that's what I was thinking of. = I honestly can't remember if this frees your from hat-eating or not

Oh I realize this isn't actually going to happen. Everyone applies to PhD programs thinking they will work hard and "it won't be me" who has insufficient publications, struggling on the job market, taking 7 years instead of 5, who is not less than LOVED by profs in their program. We wouldn't apply if we didn't believe we would be successful. Then after a couple years in the program, they see other smart, hard-working students struggling on the job market or ending up at less than desirable places... their probability calculus changes: suddenly that certain, yet less preferred, return X now (less desirable work perhaps for decent money and a desirable location), becomes a better option over an uncertain, yet preferred, for return Y in the future (tenure track job). Other job offers, family obligations, etc. probably play into that, but if the latter outcome were more certain (somehow) there might still be less incentive to quit early for any other reason. I guess bottom line, I'm arguing it has a lot to do with expected value, but its the perceived probability of the outcome changing rather than the value of the outcome. Does that make sense? Agree? Disagree? Thoughts? *Tired, please don't judge to harshly if I butchered that somehow, I THINK my general point is there... You are probably on to something here... effectively it could just become a low-paying job where people "work" until they can get a higher paying job (which is probably sooner than 5-7 years). I'll be honest, my funded MA allowed me to: put myself in a much better financial position than I was before I started, do an internship I wouldn't have been eligible for as a non-student, make some connections, get free training for (non-academic, non-poli-sci) job skills - and that was entirely my plan going into it. Sadly, I made the mistake of falling in love with academia, so now here I am... (granted, if my terminal MA program weren't terminating soon, I'd be gone ALREADY)

Runner12 claimed a Harvard admit, he was a regular enough poster until the past couple weeks or so. But that seems fairly typical, once people have gotten many of their acceptances/rejections they post less frequently or not at all.

Congrats, this is a rare moment when I'm pleased that I've been proven wrong ...though now that gives me one more school to stress out about...

Ugh, yes! I seriously though I was the only one still waiting Also waiting on Rutgers, someone posted on here that they emailed the dept who said we should know by 3/15. Been checking app status daily because I'm so eager for this process to be over. Also, does someone want to claim that UMD comment on the results board? At this point, with stuff like that I just assume troll unless its claimed by someone here.

There are far too many people to quote/respond to in the "what can be done to reduce attrition?" "how can success in grad school be predicted" so I'll raise the following points. 1) With the prospect of predicting outcome based on personal circumstance - looking at evidence that suggests people of a certain age are more likely to drop out or succeed, or people with a certain number of years or type of work experience, or people of a certain gender or familial status runs the obvious risk of discrimination. I don't think anyone wants to go down that road, unless they are a mid-twenties, white male, already married and living off a trust fund (because the data would probably screw the rest of us). 2) What does everyone think about decreasing attrition by "managing the field?" I would imagine that in addition to a financial incentive to quit early and take a non-academic job, there is also incentive based on the EXTREMELY dim prospects in the academic job market. Why not limit the number of PhDs that can be awarded or the number of programs that can award? If someone knows better, please correct me, but I'm fairly certain medical fields such as physical and occupational therapy regulate the number of programs that can grant degrees and the number of degrees each program can grant - and this corresponds with some regulatory association's knowledge of the job market (so you don't get schools turning the grad program into a cash cow, as they have with law schools, admitting more students than the job market can handle). I'm not suggesting eliminate the competitive nature of the job market entirely (since certain schools can make better offers and certain jobs are more desirable than others). But with something like only 50-60 percent of PS PhDs obtaining TT jobs, I think decreasing the number of candidates on the job market via limiting the number of PhD programs or PhDs that a school can grant could increase the incentive to complete the PhD. This might not be feasible, but might be worth discussing (we might not be able to realistically "manage the field" but I am willing to bet better prospects in the job market would decrease attrition). Thoughts?

I am fairly certain (heard from another user who PM'd me) they have sent out at least one acceptance. Given the program is in its inaugural year (for the incoming class), they are aiming for a class of around 5.

Legit question. I fall into the former category (masters to overcome deficiencies), so take my advice for what its worth. It could be endogenous to my research interests, but the CVs of most leading academics I've seen suggest going straight from undergrad to grad is more common (which could vary over time). This may be different in a field such as public policy. Few political science PhD programs (that I've seen or looked into) have said something other than "often applicants/incoming students have masters degrees but we don't expect that our incoming students have more than undergrad knowledge of poli sci (though some come from different fields)." Work experience can be a bit of a catch-22, it often takes a graduate degree to get the work experience, yet it is useful before undertaking graduate research. It partially depends on your goals. If you think you'd prefer a TT job in an interdisciplinary area studies program, it (MA, etc) might be helpful. If you are seeking a job with a think tank, State Dept, CIA, etc, specializing in area studies a degree in area studies might be sufficient for where you want to go. But for a general poli sci TT job, I doubt prior MA work is hugely correlated with placement, though I could be wrong. I suppose a way to test this would be to look at recent placements from various schools and look at the CVs: what did this candidate do before their PhD program? Though I'm more inclined to believe it depended on other things. As for the one grad student you observed, n=1 is not significant. If you don't have at least a few WTF moments while doing field research overseas for the first time, you are probably doing it wrong . Also know that MA programs (in area studies) rarely include field research. Given the time and cost, I was strongly advised against it even though I did field research as an undergrad. I would say talk to faculty in your research area, 1) see what they did, 2) see what they recommend given your specific background. Applying to a number of options (PhD, MA, Fulbright, other fellowships, think tank jobs, etc.) can't hurt as long as you tailor each app specifically. But if you have a good enough resume to get into a PhD program now (next cycle, etc) and you know that's what you want... Do it! Don't waste your time/money on an MA if you don't need to. When you are on the job market, people will care about your language skills, methods skills, area-expertise, dissertation and publications - but they will care more about whether you have it or you don't, rather than if you acquired it through an MA, work experience, or during the 5-7 years you spend at your PhD program. There is little substitute for making good use of your time, wherever you spend it. My .02, take it for what its worth.

I believe UMD is done with their admits and is just dragging their feet on sending rejections. As a non-insider (who applied there and also has not heard anything), I could be wrong, but that seemed to be consensus at earlier points on the thread. I don't remember hearing of/seeing a rejection on the results page, other than one received through inquiry. Regardless, it looks you still have some good schools to choose from