Longtime Lurker

The following notes are based on my experiences as well as those of two of my friends who applied this cycle but who don't post on this site. PM me if you have questions about our backgrounds or results. Good luck to future applicants! First and Foremost: - Don't over-analyze the admissions process. Forums like these are meant to assist you with your applications, not distract you from them. This is a stressful time and we all want to do what we can to secure a favorable outcome, but once you've achieved a basic understanding of what is required, you're better off focusing on your statement of purpose, researching schools, etc. rather than searching for additional anecdotes about the admissions process. You'll never be able to figure everything out because department procedures and preferences vary widely, but those distinctions are not apparent to outsiders. Making a List: - Apply broadly. You may get into some programs you thought were a stretch. On the other hand, you'll almost certainly be rejected by a few schools that you believed were a good fit and within your reach - it all depends on whom among the faculty are on the admissions committee in a given year and what their particular interests are. - Don't apply to a school for any reason other than because you think it is a good fit for your research interests and will help you achieve your goals as a doctoral student (and thereafter as an applicant on the job market, though that's obviously much harder to predict). Likewise, don't apply to a program unless you would happily matriculate if it was the only place to accept you. - Seek advice from professors and friends who might have informed opinions about specific departments, but also acknowledge that programs change and the prevailing wisdom about specific schools may be out-of-date. Expect your preconceptions about specific programs to change somewhat once you have a chance to visit them. The Application: - The personal statement is often the most important component of the application. The applicant should signal that he or she can write clearly, has researched the department and its faculty, and has the potential to conduct interesting research. - Letters of recommendation are also important, but as applicants we have minimal control over them. If the two options are in conflict, you should generally ask for letters from the professors who know you best rather than from those who are well-connected. - Academic pedigree helps, but it isn't a requirement. Getting a masters can help if your undergraduate record has question marks. Having a few years of work experience is also useful as a signal that one is committed to returning to academia. - As far as GRE and GPA are concerned, applicants must clear a minimum threshold that varies by program and admissions committee (given that other aspects of an application can demonstrate facility with language, minimum requirements for quantitative scores are generally more firmly established than those for verbal). Beyond the initial hurdle, there are diminishing returns to better numbers. There's probably a slight difference between earning a 700/700 versus an 800/800 or between a 3.6 and a 3.9 GPA, but those distinctions are not nearly as significant as one might initially assume. You should work to earn the best score possible, but as long as you're in the ballpark you shouldn't worry too much. - The importance of the writing sample seems to vary widely by program, but in general it's little more than another opportunity for applicants to demonstrate that they can write clearly. It's also likely to be interpreted in the context of one's experience, so more is expected from someone with a masters than an applicant coming straight from undergrad. - You aren't expected to be a star already and needn't pretend to be. The assumption is that you don't know very much yet, but that you have the potential to grow into a competent academic and are eager to learn.

I know a person who has been wait-listed by Harvard's Department of Government but who doesn't post on this forum. I could be mistaken about the timing, but I believe that in that case the wait-list notification was sent the day before admitted students were notified.

Honestly, these examples don't seem unreasonable to me. Sure, someone who is accepted to Chicago will most likely choose to attend that program rather than, say, Colorado, but it isn't a foregone conclusion. Overall rank (which is already debatable) may not account for a school's specific strengths in different areas, methods, or sub-fields. As much as we pretend otherwise, it's also possible that non-academic considerations will also influence an applicant's final decision (proximity to family, affinity for a given location or climate, etc.). In my case, for example, Columbia and UCSD are ranked significantly ahead of Florida State and Penn State overall, but the decision is much narrower in my specific area of interest. Anything could happen once I have a chance to interact with department members during the visitation weekends and have an opportunity to meet potential advisers. In other words, it's natural that admissions committees continue to pursue the most desirable candidates until they receive signals that the applicants in question are no longer interested.

Congrats to the Maryland admits!

Congrats!

As a heads-up, Columbia and Rice have both sent group emails regarding visitation weekend, so I assume that all admitted applicants to each program have already been notified.

Congrats to the Michigan admits!

Has anyone else (who registered earlier than this morning, immediately after we raised suspicions about trolling) received an email? I apologize for being skeptical, but I'm still surprised by how few people have claimed admissions or denials given that Michigan normally distributes notifications simultaneously. If I'm wrong, I sincerely apologize in advance but hopefully you can understand. We're all just looking for as much information as possible.

I suppose it's still relatively early in the day, but I'm surprised that more people aren't reporting from Michigan, especially since they're apparently sending rejections as well. Wonder if we're being trolled.

A friend of mine who applied to UCLA in IR was accepted today (without being contacted beforehand). I'm not sure whether that information is helpful to anyone, but at the very least it means you shouldn't lose hope just because a few IR spots were also announced on Monday.

There's also no need to rain on someone else's parade by belittling a school after being rejected by it.

Wow folks are getting snarky on the results page. Remember this is a competitive process and schools have a limited capacity to accept students. A rejection shouldn't be seen as a judgment that you aren't fit to be a political scientist anywhere, but rather as an indication that the pool of potential students is very deep and the committee was forced to make a guess on who would be the best fit for their program based on limited information, time, and resources. Hopefully you'll be accepted elsewhere.

Congrats! Out of interest, what sub-field are those who have heard from Chicago? A friend of mine who was also accepted studies American politics. The email also went to his spam folder, by the way.

Congrats to everyone who has been accepted over the past few days! I'm not sure about most of the other programs, but from what I remember of last year's thread, UCLA tends to roll out admissions over the course of a week or so. Hopefully that means folks will continue to hear good news in the days to come. I have to admit, I'm a little bit surprised that we haven't heard more from UCSD after the wave of rejections on Friday, so there may be movement from them as well.

Congrats! I know what you mean - I've been lucky enough to be at home each time I've been notified, and thus have been free to jump around the apartment in celebration. Staying calm while answering the phone is the biggest challenge. Really happy for you!