avatarmomo

jmu, your comments are extremely useful, thank you very much. Regarding the point number 5, I paraphrased the idea that top programs have a different departmental culture. The argument goes like this: Top departments that prefer collaboration, for instance, offer the closest relationship between adviser and grad students, which is not available elsewhere; whereas other top departments that value competitiveness establish a cut-throat competitive environment where grad students compete for more funding, more support, more visibility etc. Just a reminder, I do not endorse any of these points, including this one. But, I have come upon these points mentioned over and over again during the admission process. Anyway, I thank you for your answers. They really clarified many things for me. And, sorry for my English.

I think the "holy shit" thread has not been very productive in providing future grad students with a clear guideline to assess graduate programs. It came to the point where people say "there is no real research going on in non-top 20 departments", which is completely nonsense. Those of us who are going to start graduate school in non-top 20 programs should better be hopeful towards the future, without being completely unrealistic. I guess, being disappointed and unhappy about the future program you will attend, only because of its position in the rankings, is the worst way to start graduate school. I admit that people should know the facts about academic hierarchy as often reminded by people already enrolled in top programs. But, one should also believe that she/he can be the most successful person in his/her cohort, or even in the whole history of that program. Even if one cannot reach such high goals, she can still be a very very strong sociologist at the end. People need motivation in the beginning of their graduate studies, so they should not be discouraged. As a sidenote, I agree that it is almost impossible to get a job at Michigan if you have a PhD from a program outside the top-20. But, considering today's job market, it is also very unlikely that you will immediately land a job at top-20 schools with a Michigan PhD. There are also huge variations within the top 10-20 programs. Check out Stanford's placement record for the last 7 years: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/soc/doctoral/recgrads.html. Except 2011, which has been a great year for Stanford, I do not think it is better than UC Irvine's placement: http://www.sociology.uci.edu/soc_grad_placement. I would like to know how much individual factors can make an impact on the game. Below, I listed some of the answers I encountered to the question "why are top programs better than lower ranked ones?". To what extent do they ring true? To what extent can individual factors supersede the particular shortcomings in lower-ranked programs? 1. Simply quality of training is better in top programs. By the time you get your PhD, you will have an excellent background in research methods/design, theory, and the particular sub-field you are interested in. Scholars in top programs are both the leading figures in their particular fields and excellent teachers. As you go below the rankings, quality of education deteriorates. 2. Quality of graduate students is better. Top programs are more selective. They recruit people who are better at asking sociologically relevant questions, thinking analytically, and organizing their arguments in a clear and persuasive style. In top programs, collaborating with really smart graduate students provides you with better opportunities to cultivate your research interests and get published. 3. There are more opportunities. Resources that supplement graduate student research are more abundant in top programs, such as funding, research centers, academic writing centers etc. You can participate in numerous conferences, research projects, workshops where you get the chance to work with or get inspired by leading sociologists. And, you will have money to do those things. 4. Getting published in top sociology journals is easier. Publishing is the key to academic progress, including landing a job at top institutions. In top departments, there are more people who often publish papers in top journals (AJS, ASR, SF, T&S, SP etc.). Publishing in such journals requires a certain set of skills, and these people can help you learn the craft of academic writing. You can not learn these skills in low ranked programs, simply because there are not as many people who publish in top journals. 5. Departmental culture is more collaborative or competitive. Either in a collaborative or a competitive way, you feel the peer pressure and the faculty's high expectations of you, and that pushes you forward. You start to have ever higher expectations of yourself, and this reflects on your work. 6. Prestige matters. You are invited into an elite social network. Your professors often collaborate with other professors of other top departments. And their letters of recommendation will weigh more when it comes to the job market. The frequency of contacts between top programs is greater than that between a top program and a low ranked program. By the time you start to look for a job, the faculty at other top programs and potential recruiters will be familiar with you and your work, thanks to the frequent relations among elite departments. Also, if two candidates with the same credentials compete for the same job, the one who will be hired is going to be from the more prestigious school. 7. Organization of departments are better adjusted to rising trends in sociology and to the job market (I think this is the case at Princeton). There is a low rate of attrition. If you follow the guideline provided for you throughout your graduate studies, you will get a highly demanded job at the end. Your adviser knows what is and will be expected by the recruiter departments. You will be guided appropriately. If something becomes lacking in the program, the department will remedy it as soon as possible though hiring new faculty or providing new resources for grad students. They can do this in no time because they have lots of money.

Turned down Minnesota and Binghamton.

Yu Xie at Michigan might interest you. Congrads!

The easy answer is not Madison. USNews rankings do not directly correspond with placement records. For instance, Northwestern has a much better placement than Stanford, which is ranked higher. Likewise, although ranked lower, UCLA has a better placement record compared to Wisconsin. Also, I heard that grad students at Wisconsin are not super satisfied with their stipend, which is an important point to consider. True, Brown is good but its placement record is not as good as that of UCLA or Wisconsin. However, you should keep in mind that Brown has a small program with much smaller cohorts than other schools. Brown's total number of grad students is around 40. I think UCLA has around 100, and Wisconsin has around 150. Cohort size directly influences the rankings, as you may have noticed most of the schools in the top 20 have larger cohorts than schools outside the top 20. I agree with xdarthveganx in that coming from a non-top 20 program makes landing on a job at a top 20 institution harder. But, it is definitely not impossible. In fact, xdarthveganx's school UC Irvine, which has a great program, recently hired a Brown alumni as an assistant professor. I am one of Brown admits, and I am strongly considering their offer. What I heard from current grads, faculty, and recent alumni at Brown convinced me that the program is very very strong, especially in the areas you are interested in. Also, they have some great research centers that could complement your research interests. If you have not done it yet, check for instance, the Watson Institute and the graduate program in development. Here is my advice: If you think that your research interests might change during your graduate years (which is common), you might be slightly better off going to UCLA because of job opportunities. But only slightly. Even in the very top programs, except maybe Princeton, usually only one or two people land on jobs at top 20 schools. Statistically speaking, chances of getting a job at top institutions depend more on your work and less on which top school you graduated. But, if you think that you might be interested in studying nationalism and comparative historical sociology, then UCLA is your best choice. If you are certain about what you want to study, (demography, development, and inequality), Brown might have more to offer. And, despite small cohorts, Brown's placement record should not be underestimated. PM me if you have anything you want to share or ask.

Is there anyone who applied to NYU and did not hear back from them? Based on last years' results, NYU seems to be sending out rejections on the same day. Is it possible that my application was not reviewed at all? I'm getting a little worried.

Is anyone considering accepting their offer? As far as I know, the program is strong in three main areas: development, migration/urban, and environmental sociology. If I go there, I would probably focus on the sociology of development. I know, the ASA has a rather new section on development. What else can you tell me about the future of this area? Also, I would love to hear more about the department. I cannot attend the visiting event so I appreciate any opinion/advice you might want to give.

Claudio Benzecry at UConn and Virag Molnar at the New School.

Officially rejected at Washington (expected), and wait-listed at Hopkins (disappointed). Congrats to recent admits and good luck to people who are still waiting.

As an international applicant, I have almost no idea what to look for in a health insurance plan. One school I got accepted says that they cover 95% of insurance premiums, the other covers the full cost. Which services should be provided by a good insurance in your opinion? What should I expect?

Congrats! NYU was probably my top choice. May I ask how you were contacted. Was the email from DGS or POI? Thanks.

I have one question. Who are the Marxist professors doing comparative-historical research at Northwestern? Thank you jacib.

Brown is a good fit for me, still I was not expecting an acceptance. Thank you gingin and curiouslyoptimistic. Good luck!

Accepted at Brown. Nice program. Happy.

Based on US News (2005, 2009, 2013) and NRC rankings (1995), it is safe to say Wisconsin has always been very close or at the top position. In Orgtheory's 2013 survey, Wisconsin was ranked 10th, below UNC and Indiana, which seems not likely to be true. In NRC 1995, Washington made it to the top 10, but it was ranked 17th in US News 2005 and 2009 assessments. In 2013 US News rankings, Washington has the 23th place based on scatterplot's estimate of the new data (not the average score US News published). Washington is probably not a school on the rise. But, I do not know why.

Congrats Maleficent! Big up!

Congrats to everyone who got an acceptance from UW. I can scratch Washington off my list now. I guess it was not a good fit.

Anyone claiming the last UCLA acceptance? I want to learn about the funding package for internationals at UCLA, if that is not too personal. I kind of wish I had applied there. Fit was really good, but potential problems related to funding for internationals discouraged me.

Thank you SocGirl! International applicant. GRE: 160V, 168Q, 4.0AW. Sub-3.0 undergrad GPA, 3.81 Masters GPA. Some independent research experience. 3 publications. Research interests: Social movements, development, class analysis, comparative-historical. Good luck to you all.

I claim the first Minnesota acceptance. One of my top choices. Very excited.

Thank you for the great advice and encouragement cultsoc. I will think over all the points you mentioned. I am not sure about the questions I can ask them though, since they put all the relevant information I needed on their website. I will try to get ready and do the things you said, but it seems things will depend on my mood and calmness at the time of the interview. Thank you very much again.

I got an email from a faculty member inviting me for a skype phone interview. This is not a "usual" interview, as the school does not usually conduct interviews with prospective students, as far as I know. I guess the reason for this interview is that my English proficiency test results were not very good. So, I believe they are concerned if I can speak fluent enough to be a teaching assistant. The professor said they wanted to talk to me about my research and my interest in the PhD program as well. I won't disclose the name of the school (not yet), but it is definitely one of my top choices. This is the first interview I will participate, and I am worried in case I cannot speak fluently during the interview. I really feel very nervous. Could you please give me some tips on how to prepare for this interview and how to behave during the interview? Also, I am curious if they are going to ask me about details of my research and my opinions about the works of the faculty members (potential advisors) I referred in my SOP? Thanks.

How about "Doxa"?

Jacib, thank you for the great and really helpful advice. And yes, I am from Turkey. Currently I live in Istanbul. I have read some works by the scholars you recommended, although my research interests are different. I would add Umit Cizre and Rusen Cakir to your list if you have not read them already. Cizre was my advisor and she is an authority in the field of state-military relationship in Turkey. But, she also wrote a number of books and articles on Islamic political parties and especially on the AKP. Rusen Cakir, although not in academia, is a specialist in Islamic organizations. I am not sure if his books have been translated into English though. Anyway, good luck with your graduate studies and thanks again for your help. Daniel, thank you for your suggestions. I am glad you found my comments helpful. Your SOP is really well written and I believe it is going to be appreciated by the schools you are applying to. I am also applying to NYU, and I can say that your fit is better compared to mine. Best of luck with your applications.

Thank you for the suggestions. Based on your comments, I guess there is not much to change in my SOP at this point. One question for jacib tough: I am a little puzzled about how to convince the adcomm that my research can be completed in a reasonable amount of time. Obviously, I will not try to come up with some huge projects like Mann's Sources of Social Power. Mine is going to be a straightforward historical comparative study, probably touching upon the fields of political economy, social movements, and ethnicity. What should I avoid in order to convince the adcomm that my research is doable? By the way, if you are planning to do ethnographic research in Turkey, I may provide some help when you arrive here. So, keep in touch if you need anything. Good luck Maleficient with your applications. And thank you jacib for being around to help future admits.