Orlien

I saw "Texas A&M" in my new unread email this afternoon, and thought, dread. I know this program has yet to send out rejections, so I knew it was the day of reckoning. 
 
Well, I was wrong, it was an acceptance letter. I just now read it another time just to be sure. I literally can't believe this. I'm not even happy or excited yet, I am just in disbelief since this was my top dream program, and I never thought I had a chance. (Okay, it's starting to sink it, and thus, the happiness and excitement!)
 
Looking forward to meeting everyone else who is  A&M-bound next Fall!

Eh, I guess I'll go:
 
PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 5
Major(s)/Minor(s): Molecular Biology
Undergrad GPA: 3.3
Type of Grad: N/A
Grad GPA: N/A
GRE:  170v, 165q, 5.0aw
Any Special Courses: 3 course graduate quant methods core sequence, 2 course graduate American core sequence
Letters of Recommendation: Three political science profs who I know well.
Research Experience: 3 years RA for multiple profs; Senior Thesis, a couple of seminar papers
Teaching Experience: Stats and R Tutoring
Subfield/Research Interests: American, with a primary interest in legislatures, secondary interest in race/ethnicity.
Other: Research internship at a DC thinktank junior summer.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Duke ($$), WashU ($$), Rochester ($$), Berkeley ($$), UCLA ($$), UCSD ($$),  Princeton ($$), Michigan ($$), Columbia ($$), UNC ($$), Stanford ($$), Chicago MAPSS (1/2 $$)
Waitlists: none
Rejections: Wisconsin
Pending: Harvard
Going to: Will decide after visits.
 
LESSONS LEARNED:
For me, deciding to pursue a PhD in Political Science was a big risk. I had to make very significant sacrifices to pursue this path. There was no plan B. I am really grateful that things have been working out well so far – let’s hope my luck holds in the future.
 
These are the things I found about my subjective graduate application experience. My experiences may not be applicable to everyone, but I hope they help.
 
1. Grad Schools are not necessarily “looking for a reason to ding you”
When I was reading up on applying to PhD programs, I ran across an article by Dan Drezner (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/03/18/so_you_want_to_get_into_a_political_science_phd_program_part_one)
 
He argues that because of the surplus of Political Science PhD applicants, the bar for applicants is set very high – the adcom is basically looking for a reason to reject you and move on to the next file.
 
When I read this advice, I was very nervous, because I come built-in with a reason to reject. I have a completely unrelated major, and a (relatively) low GPA. I was worried that the adcom would read my application as a “failed biology major that wasn’t serious about PS”. The beginning of my SOP focused on showing that even though I was a biology major, I had invested serious time and effort in preparing for a political science PhD program. 
 
So I think my advice would be “anticipate weaknesses in your application, and work to remedy them early on”.
 
 2. Build good relationships with your professors.
I’m pretty sure that my luck this cycle was due to the strength of my rec letters.  I am extremely grateful to my letter writers.
 
Professors have the best perspective on the graduate admissions process because they sit on the adcoms. However, as academics tend to have differing opinions, so it’s a good idea to get to know more than one professor.
 
I was very lucky – I clicked well with literally the first political science professor that I met, who continued to advise me regularly throughout my time as an undergraduate.  I always made a point of going to office hours at least once for every poli sci professor whose class I was taking. You don’t have to have an impressive question – most professors I’ve met were very encouraging once they found out that I was looking to pursue a PhD in political science.
 
RA work is also a very good way to get to know professors – it’s also a great opportunity to demonstrate your work ethic.
 
3. Invest in quantitative skills (if applicable)
Obviously, this doesn’t apply if you’re a political theorist (and if you are a political theorist, all the more power to you!) – but if you are not a political theorist, it may be more applicable than you think.  
 
As a PhD student, it is very likely that you will be taking a quant methods course/sequence in your first year. Those classes are hard, but ultimately they help prepare you for doing research in political science. Having those tools as an undergraduate makes your undergrad research more impressive, they show that you are dedicated to political science, and they will make your first year in graduate school easier (at least I hope!)    
 
SOP:
 
PM me for SOP.

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

I claim a Harvard

And this marks the end of my cycle. It's truly been a wild ride. Thanks, Gradcafe, for making it a little more bearable.

Good luck to everyone still waiting for results, and to everyone on waitlist.

I hope to see you guys at admit weekends

Eh, I guess I'll go:
 
PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 5
Major(s)/Minor(s): Molecular Biology
Undergrad GPA: 3.3
Type of Grad: N/A
Grad GPA: N/A
GRE:  170v, 165q, 5.0aw
Any Special Courses: 3 course graduate quant methods core sequence, 2 course graduate American core sequence
Letters of Recommendation: Three political science profs who I know well.
Research Experience: 3 years RA for multiple profs; Senior Thesis, a couple of seminar papers
Teaching Experience: Stats and R Tutoring
Subfield/Research Interests: American, with a primary interest in legislatures, secondary interest in race/ethnicity.
Other: Research internship at a DC thinktank junior summer.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Duke ($$), WashU ($$), Rochester ($$), Berkeley ($$), UCLA ($$), UCSD ($$),  Princeton ($$), Michigan ($$), Columbia ($$), UNC ($$), Stanford ($$), Chicago MAPSS (1/2 $$)
Waitlists: none
Rejections: Wisconsin
Pending: Harvard
Going to: Will decide after visits.
 
LESSONS LEARNED:
For me, deciding to pursue a PhD in Political Science was a big risk. I had to make very significant sacrifices to pursue this path. There was no plan B. I am really grateful that things have been working out well so far – let’s hope my luck holds in the future.
 
These are the things I found about my subjective graduate application experience. My experiences may not be applicable to everyone, but I hope they help.
 
1. Grad Schools are not necessarily “looking for a reason to ding you”
When I was reading up on applying to PhD programs, I ran across an article by Dan Drezner (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/03/18/so_you_want_to_get_into_a_political_science_phd_program_part_one)
 
He argues that because of the surplus of Political Science PhD applicants, the bar for applicants is set very high – the adcom is basically looking for a reason to reject you and move on to the next file.
 
When I read this advice, I was very nervous, because I come built-in with a reason to reject. I have a completely unrelated major, and a (relatively) low GPA. I was worried that the adcom would read my application as a “failed biology major that wasn’t serious about PS”. The beginning of my SOP focused on showing that even though I was a biology major, I had invested serious time and effort in preparing for a political science PhD program. 
 
So I think my advice would be “anticipate weaknesses in your application, and work to remedy them early on”.
 
 2. Build good relationships with your professors.
I’m pretty sure that my luck this cycle was due to the strength of my rec letters.  I am extremely grateful to my letter writers.
 
Professors have the best perspective on the graduate admissions process because they sit on the adcoms. However, as academics tend to have differing opinions, so it’s a good idea to get to know more than one professor.
 
I was very lucky – I clicked well with literally the first political science professor that I met, who continued to advise me regularly throughout my time as an undergraduate.  I always made a point of going to office hours at least once for every poli sci professor whose class I was taking. You don’t have to have an impressive question – most professors I’ve met were very encouraging once they found out that I was looking to pursue a PhD in political science.
 
RA work is also a very good way to get to know professors – it’s also a great opportunity to demonstrate your work ethic.
 
3. Invest in quantitative skills (if applicable)
Obviously, this doesn’t apply if you’re a political theorist (and if you are a political theorist, all the more power to you!) – but if you are not a political theorist, it may be more applicable than you think.  
 
As a PhD student, it is very likely that you will be taking a quant methods course/sequence in your first year. Those classes are hard, but ultimately they help prepare you for doing research in political science. Having those tools as an undergraduate makes your undergrad research more impressive, they show that you are dedicated to political science, and they will make your first year in graduate school easier (at least I hope!)    
 
SOP:
 
PM me for SOP.

Eh, I guess I'll go:
 
PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 5
Major(s)/Minor(s): Molecular Biology
Undergrad GPA: 3.3
Type of Grad: N/A
Grad GPA: N/A
GRE:  170v, 165q, 5.0aw
Any Special Courses: 3 course graduate quant methods core sequence, 2 course graduate American core sequence
Letters of Recommendation: Three political science profs who I know well.
Research Experience: 3 years RA for multiple profs; Senior Thesis, a couple of seminar papers
Teaching Experience: Stats and R Tutoring
Subfield/Research Interests: American, with a primary interest in legislatures, secondary interest in race/ethnicity.
Other: Research internship at a DC thinktank junior summer.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Duke ($$), WashU ($$), Rochester ($$), Berkeley ($$), UCLA ($$), UCSD ($$),  Princeton ($$), Michigan ($$), Columbia ($$), UNC ($$), Stanford ($$), Chicago MAPSS (1/2 $$)
Waitlists: none
Rejections: Wisconsin
Pending: Harvard
Going to: Will decide after visits.
 
LESSONS LEARNED:
For me, deciding to pursue a PhD in Political Science was a big risk. I had to make very significant sacrifices to pursue this path. There was no plan B. I am really grateful that things have been working out well so far – let’s hope my luck holds in the future.
 
These are the things I found about my subjective graduate application experience. My experiences may not be applicable to everyone, but I hope they help.
 
1. Grad Schools are not necessarily “looking for a reason to ding you”
When I was reading up on applying to PhD programs, I ran across an article by Dan Drezner (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/03/18/so_you_want_to_get_into_a_political_science_phd_program_part_one)
 
He argues that because of the surplus of Political Science PhD applicants, the bar for applicants is set very high – the adcom is basically looking for a reason to reject you and move on to the next file.
 
When I read this advice, I was very nervous, because I come built-in with a reason to reject. I have a completely unrelated major, and a (relatively) low GPA. I was worried that the adcom would read my application as a “failed biology major that wasn’t serious about PS”. The beginning of my SOP focused on showing that even though I was a biology major, I had invested serious time and effort in preparing for a political science PhD program. 
 
So I think my advice would be “anticipate weaknesses in your application, and work to remedy them early on”.
 
 2. Build good relationships with your professors.
I’m pretty sure that my luck this cycle was due to the strength of my rec letters.  I am extremely grateful to my letter writers.
 
Professors have the best perspective on the graduate admissions process because they sit on the adcoms. However, as academics tend to have differing opinions, so it’s a good idea to get to know more than one professor.
 
I was very lucky – I clicked well with literally the first political science professor that I met, who continued to advise me regularly throughout my time as an undergraduate.  I always made a point of going to office hours at least once for every poli sci professor whose class I was taking. You don’t have to have an impressive question – most professors I’ve met were very encouraging once they found out that I was looking to pursue a PhD in political science.
 
RA work is also a very good way to get to know professors – it’s also a great opportunity to demonstrate your work ethic.
 
3. Invest in quantitative skills (if applicable)
Obviously, this doesn’t apply if you’re a political theorist (and if you are a political theorist, all the more power to you!) – but if you are not a political theorist, it may be more applicable than you think.  
 
As a PhD student, it is very likely that you will be taking a quant methods course/sequence in your first year. Those classes are hard, but ultimately they help prepare you for doing research in political science. Having those tools as an undergraduate makes your undergrad research more impressive, they show that you are dedicated to political science, and they will make your first year in graduate school easier (at least I hope!)    
 
SOP:
 
PM me for SOP.

Sorry about your cycle Good luck!
 
Also, I'd recommend Verzani's book, "Using R for Introductory Statistics". Quant and R go together like PB&J

Last week I got three rejections within an hour, all while at dinner with my parents. 
 
It. Was. Rough. 

Because, hey, your right to be catered to is more important than her right to carry on with department business, teaching, research, and maintaining a private life! Gross.

I really hope it will be useful for someone here:
I have just declined a CU-Boulder offer, Theory subfield. They asked me to inform them of my decision as soon as I know for sure, so hopefully they will be making this offer to someone on the waitlist very soon.
 
I sincerely hope it means exciting news for someone.
I discovered, it is pretty heartbreaking to have to decline a program you are really excited about. 

This. Exactly this.

So here it is… the Yale bloodshed… I'm so sorry for those who got bad news. I think now is the perfect time to make fun of Yale… I hope this makes you feel better:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqsTatw-RTI
 
and 
 
http://www.safetyschool.org/

Sorry about your cycle Good luck!
 
Also, I'd recommend Verzani's book, "Using R for Introductory Statistics". Quant and R go together like PB&J

Agreed. It's a pretty shitty thing to say

Agreed. It's a pretty shitty thing to say

To the person who was rejected from Stanford and wishes you'd told them you were African-American...
 
When the sting of the rejection wears off, I hope you feel pretty crappy about that comment. You should feel crappy about it.
 
Edited for grammar and anger.

The program at Durmstrang is ranked better, anyway. No big deal.

This is a really rough cycle given that Hogwarts rejection... Still, I hear the DADA Department there has had a hard time keeping good faculty, so it may not be the best bet for the near future.
 
Highlight of my obsessive results checking day.

James, I think it's a little bit ironic that you're complaining about people bragging about declining great schools when you've got all of the schools you have been accepted to detailed in your sig.
 
And in any case, I see this forum as kind of a collective support group for the people who are applying to graduate schools. Face it, most people who we interact with regularly (other than grad students and profs) don't know what this process is like, how nervewracking it is. It's good to have a forum where we can all go through this collectively.

Duke, WashU, Rochester, Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, Princeton, Michigan, Columbia, UNC-Chapel Hill
 
I cast a very broad net when applying
 
...Please don't hate me xD

Duke, WashU, Rochester, Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, Princeton, Michigan, Columbia, UNC-Chapel Hill
 
I cast a very broad net when applying
 
...Please don't hate me xD