TakeMyCoffeeBlack

Yes, absolutely thinking about this. There are no easy answers. FTR, I refer to US News for general rankings, and NRC for more specific qualities. NRC is more valuable, but requires more brain power to interpret. That said, the difference between a T60 and T20 can be pretty significant. Ph.D. isn't only about your substantive interests, it's also about your training. Chances are, a T20 will train you better to be a political scientist, even if the T60 has a superstar in your field. This isn't always the case, but it's important to consider. The T20 is also much more likely to get you interviews down the road. Don't forget, your research interests will likely expand and change over time, too, so you shouldn't sell yourself on a program based on one professor (if you have options anyway). That is all to say that maybe a T60 could be your best option for a lot of reasons. But my immediate instinct is to favor the T20, when faced with such a choice. (side note: perhaps this mind experiment might be better comparing T20 and T40, or T40 and T60, etc.)

Be sure to click on the actual report in the press release.

I appreciate when girls buy me drinks. And they must do it knowing nothing will come of it, since I talk about my girlfriend like she's a goddess. And you know what, maybe that's how guys should start approaching drink buying. As a friendly gesture, nothing more.

I have reason to believe this about U Washington, too. Though it isn't clear that all interviews have been done.

Ah, should have known. I attended mass at the St. Joan of Arc chapel at what I assume to be your school. I'll be there for a conference in March, actually.

I really wanted BC to "fit" me. I'm very active in the Jesuit education scene, and I absolutely love Boston. Sounds like promising news - fingers crossed!

Isn't this exactly what you're looking for?

Your stats are fine. Seriously. It might come down to SOP, fit, and this year's sub-field needs. Your GRE/GPA aren't keeping you out, especially of the schools on your list.

Right. But I wonder what the Heritage Foundation's motive is.

I wonder if government fellowships would fund for UC_O.

*poke the hornets nest* Seriously though, when are these hornets gonna start stinging? It's oddly quiet.

http://youtu.be/sztf4hcGrB4

You mean to one of your Unis? As you know, this happened to me just the other day. The school permitted a late upload, even though they're already in committee (so it may or may not matter). Do your best to be in touch with the school - you never do know!

Depends on the country. A lot of country's will have their very own Fulbright Commission (Germany, Benelux countries, etc.). I believe - though I may be wrong - that it would otherwise be the Embassy or some other State Dept. affiliated group. Also, I'm sure most of you know about this already, but for those who don't - you can look at official numbers of applications vs. awards, including projections.

Berkeley has many Ph.D. graduates.

Unfortunately for philosophers, the coin toss isn't determined by how well they manage to draw skeletons.

Of course it's not random. It is, largely, "unknowable," because the criteria are largely subjective and vary from school to school, and committee member to committee member. You should know this part better than most, given your predicament with certain committee members questioning your application. What these students face, however, that you do not, is the probability of acceptance independent of applicant or application quality. From what I've gathered about your program - based on what you yourself have posted - is that it is new and it is highly specialized. They will take all qualifying candidates. This is not true of programs like philosophy.

Loric, most of the programs to which philosophy applicants have applied will admit ~5% of their applicants. The number of students these programs can accept is limited not by applicant quality, but internal university politics and funding.

No wave of good news feels very disconcerting at the moment.

Right, it takes more than one or two-emails to draw such a conclusion. In some cases one nasty response says a lot more than three no responses.

You could always follow up after a few days. Respond to your original e-mail, and write something like: "Hello again, Prof. X, I'm just following up on my earlier e-mail. I'm sure you're very busy, but if you do get a moment I'd appreciate your advice/thoughts/whatever."

Depends. In what context? Were you admitted? If you're not a current or admitted student, I don't think there's any reasonable expectation that they should have to respond. Of course with the caveat that they may make the program look bad, and I also wouldn't encourage you to apply somewhere with unresponsive professors.

Forget for a second that they probably wanted to say absolutely thrilled, and think about what it could mean if they had intended "enthralled." It's actually kind of funny.

I hope someone does acceptances before the day is out.