eve2008

The last thing I would say is don't worry about your math preparation. Few people have extensive quantitative backgrounds coming out of undergrad, and they will teach you want you need/want to know when you get there.

Although the stereotypes of various departments do reflect some real, underlying methodological biases, I think they can be overstated. I know of at least one person who was accepted to Stanford who has no quantitative background (and I have been told this is not uncommon), although a willingness to at least become literate in those methods is probably welcome. Similarly, for all of Berkeley's "squishy" reputation, there are several grad students there doing hard econ/stats work and they've begun hiring faculty to offer more courses within the department in game theory, advanced statistics, and other aspects of formal modeling. Anyway, I want to learn it ALL. The more tools I have in my toolbox, the better, no?

You can make a very similar argument as to why qualitative methods are BS. I used to fall into the "human behavior is too complex to quantify" camp until I got a proper introduction to quantitative methods. There is good and bad work being done in either camp, and the best work, IMHO, uses BOTH methods. Imagine how much stronger your argument is if your field work, survey number-crunching, and abstract modeling all point in the same direction. Even if you don't want to use the methods, I think everyone has to learn them now. That's the direction the discipline is heading in, and you at least want to be able to understand others' research well enough to be able to successfully absorb and/or critique it. Also, so many economists are now using their methods to study social and political phenomena (although many do a very very bad job of defining their variables because they have never been in the field and theoretically speaking, have no idea what they are talking about) and the only way to be able to respond to that literature and move everyone forward, IMHO, is to be able to do BOTH. In brief, this is not the binary, zero-sum thing some make it out to be. I've heard a lot about academics thumbing their nose at academics who write for popular audiences. I think this boils down mostly to jealousy. But it's retarded. Academics more than anyone else in society have the luxury of being able to think and dig deep, and owe it to society to engage directly with a broad audience, to transmit whatever knowledge or message they have. Otherwise, we cede that space to politicians and journalists, the former having questionable agendas, the later, in my view, having the tendency to be a bit hysterical and sensationalist. There are, of course, exceptions. I worship at the altar of Phillip Gourevitch. Biologists who remained silent when the whole intelligent design debate crept back into the mainstream are now regretting it, and a whole generation of children are being taught creationism. Anyway, I know that academia is incredibly conservative and slow to change, but I think (I hope) that our generation can encourage. At least, many of the young academics and graduate students I know demand more from their role, want to make a direct contribution. I hope the system doesn't quash that idealism.

I envy econ majors their math/stats background. It will be a bit painful to play catchup in grad school. Anyway having any, "Oh crap, I can't believe I'm actually doing this!" moments?

ding @ Yale :cry: i have to say, i'm not entirely surprised. all that really matters now is the big H, but that I won't find out about for two more weeks. waiting is agony!

i wonder if polisci people are as a group more neurotic. we seem to be a pretty active bunch on all the boards and blogs out there. speaking of which, any i don't know about yet where i can go and waste more time? of course, this is the next six years of my life. it's pretty huge and i think natural that i'm a bit distracted (and psyched!)

rollinson: congrats, by the way, on northwestern!

are we all sitting at our computers, pressing reload every 5 minutes?

Let me get in (or not) everywhere I applied first, and then I'll post about my options. I don't want to jinx myself. Are you going to the admit weekend @ Berkeley slickj07?

should i withdraw my application from a school i am now no longer considering (given the offers i have already been made)? it seems only fair to the other applicants, but i'm having a hard time drafting the email in a way that doesn't sound like, "see you lataz suckas!" of course, i suppose i don't need to give a reason. from a purely selfish perspective, i would want to see if i am admitted and perhaps visit the school for the purposes of networking and learning more about the program--i might not accept a grad school offer there, given my other choices, but i would certainly accept a job someday--and most programs do have a waiting list, official or otherwise. but my ethical gut is telling me just to withdraw and save the committee the time of reading my 35-page writing sample as well as give some other dude/chick who really wants to go there a better shot.

you have probably already seen this, but if not: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/08/21/ranking i find it incredibly useful, and it confirms what digging i've been able to do about departments where i have received offers.

March 1st-ish

hi crazypoligirl. i'm sorry about your rejection from yale. where else are you waiting to hear and what is your first choice? these are crazy, tiring, exhilarating, frustrating, exciting times. there's a school whose application i'd happily withdraw because i already got into some of my top choices, and yet somehow if i get rejected, i'd still take it kind of hard. silly, no? speaking of yale, i still haven't heard. i'm not sure why the rejections/acceptances keep trickling out as they do...does this mean you received an email to check your status today?

congratulations on NYU!!!

i'm also waiting on yale, and yes, they seem to be slowly winnowing the pool, handing out rejections and acceptances. i have heard that all decisions should be posted in the next several days. maybe they're going by subfield? the waiting is brutal!! also, has anyone on this board applied to harvard gov?

i have the same question as crazypoligirl. when you say you found out from the website, did you receive an email to go and check or did you just log in to the same system where you submitted your application? i'm particularly curious about yale applicants. thanks!

i saw a yale acceptance... are they releasing both rejections and admits in waves? still waiting to hear from Y&S and will probably be waiting another week...the suspense is killing me!

Yes, It was a mass email with information about visiting in March. Do you think schools also send rejections out all at once?

right. that makes much more sense. hey policiapps. haha... i've already headed the call. i'd like to preserve my anonymity but i guess i can say my gpa is below a 3.5, but i did very well in poli sci courses, especially in my last two years--late bloomers, there is hope for you. I went to an HYPS and had stellar recommendations (I hope, I think) which probably made a very big difference. i've been out of school for a bit and have some kick-ass international experience. i scored above a 700 on both sections of the GRE, but i am told that doesn't really matter. good luck to everyone.

hello all! this is my first post after lurking for awhile. in @ Berkeley which is absolutely fantastic. still need to hear from four more schools... anyone in at Stanford or Yale? I can't believe Yale received 8,600 applications! In fact, I don't believe it...doesn't quite make sense, unless the poster was applying to the undergraduate division...