geitost

I think it depends on what the personal reasons are.  Personally, I think the majority of emphasis should be on the academic reasons.
 
I think personal reasons should only be mentioned if those personal issues will be solved where you move, and are related to family closeness.  For example, if the school you're trying to transfer into is located nearby an elderly parent or grandparent you need to care for - that might be relevant, although you do then raise the issue of elder care and how much time that will take out of your schedule and may introduce unconscious biases on the part of the professors.  But if you want to move because your university is in the middle of nowhere and you are bored on the weekends, or because you like to hike and your university is in a large city - then no, I wouldn't mention this in a statement.  It's irrelevant.
 
I think it's safer to focus on your statement on your academic and professional reasons for moving on and maybe mention personal reasons, if they are compelling, in an interview or in-person visit.

So, I just finished my first year of coursework on a PhD two days ago. Expecting good grades on everything, have established good rapport with my advisers and other faculty members, preparing for field work later in the summer, and starting a part time gig as a research assistant to a faculty member I really admire--should be super exciting, right?!
 
But I've been majorly down in the dumps since I turned in that last final paper. All I want to do is eat, sleep, and zone out.
 
I could probably just do that for a while, except that I really need to get my butt in gear as an RA. Anyone else get in a funk at the end of the year? Suggestions on how to break out of it?
 
I think part of it might be that it's the first moment I've had all year to sit back and think about where I'm at, and mostly what I see is that everything I care about that isn't grad school is going to have to be on hold for a few more years. I've got the "who even am I?" sads.

You say you don't want help lying, but you want us to help you come up with a reason for "bad referencing deal with an acceptable excuse why it does not correspond." Unless you just tell your story, sounds to me like you are asking for our help making up a lie. But this is not complicated, you made page numbers (and perhaps also citations) up, and got caught at it.
 
From a professor's perspective, I would guess that one of the following is probably true (and I'm saying this as someone who has taught and done some grading, and has run into all kinds of unlikely situations and excuses for said situations): (1) The student straight up copied things from journal articles (=plagiarized) and tried to cover her tracks by incorrectly citing other work for the material she is discussing.  (2) The student copied another student's work that didn't include proper citations and either made things up, or the original paper already contained the wrong citations. (3) The student just made things up/copied from wikipedia/random websites and tried to back it up with random citations. (4) If the articles are all correct but the page numbers are not, the student probably did not copy down page numbers and thought she could get away with making them up.
 
(4) is the least offensive offense. I think that's basically what you did, or alternatively you marked page numbers somewhere but ran out of time before you could add them to your paper. Either way, you made the page numbers up, that much is clear. I'd try and explain your work process and how it led to this mess, and ask for an opportunity to re-submit the paper with the correct citations. If you indeed did the work, you should be able to add the correct citations. 
 
And in the future, use EndNote, RefWorks, Mendeley, LaTeX or whatever else so you don't need to deal with the references independently. You already know there is no good excuse for what happened here.

You want us to help you lie to your teacher to cover up for your laziness? That's not what we do here.
 
I suggest you come clean and explain exactly what you wrote here: that you did things at the last minute and so you just added references you used to your paper without paying attention to what you cited where. You realize it was a mistake and you will fix it (by redoing all of the citations and attributing the correct citations to the correct people). You've already been caught, lying will only make it worse. Own up to your mistake, and fix it. 

I think you need to own up to it... May not be what you want to hear, but it's better than lying about it and him finding out.
I don't think anyone here will/should help you get out of plagiarizing.

Hey everyone!
I need your help, I had to write an essay with APA reference, but I was too lazy to add the references right away and when the time came to add them I was tight in time so I thought...well let me just randomly reference my work with the articles and the books I was supposed to use... When my teacher checked my sources, obviously the references pages did not correspond to sentences/ideas so I told him something must have went wrong and it is probably the way I work by pulling out information and taking notes aside then writing my paper.. He told me I must prove him wrong with these notes...but I need a good reason why my references do not correspond to my work... Please help.. I want to message him ASAP with a reason!
Thanks in advance
 
*lesson learned for being lazy for once, need solutions*

I consider myself an introvert who likes to keep a lot of my life private. I don't volunteer a lot of personal information: if you ask me how my weekend went I won't be giving you a 30 minute soliloquy on what I was up to. When moving to a new area I factor in 6-9 months to make friends, simply because it takes me that long to start opening up to folk. I also do not necessarily view the people I study/work with as "friends", nor do I assume that I'm going to become friends with them. (Doesn't mean I don't like or don't get on well with them - just that I view our relationship as more of a 'business colleague' one).
 
As an introvert I also dress really scaffily and prefer comfortable, baggy, second-hand clothes to clingy stuff that shows off my breasts. You won't catch me wearing makeup either. It certainly isn't because I'm self-conscious or dislike my body, I simply value practicality higher than personal appearance. Putting on makeup every day is a damn faff, too.
 
So, I don't think it is a sin if there's a girl in your cohort who seems to be that way too. No one should get judged poorly for being an introvert, seeing the world slightly differently & not rushing to become your new best friend. 
 
With regards to over-achievement and competitiveness: in a job market over-saturated with PhDs, you do what you can to stand out. Working hard, asking lots of questions to make sure the professors notice you & know that you're thinking critically instead of hiding at the back, going to lots of seminars to broaden your horizons, sitting on committees to network with other academics...I think your colleague is going about grad school exactly the right way. 
 
I'd say step back from the friendship a bit if it's making you unhappy: that's kinda the opposite of what a friendship is supposed to do. Spend a bit more time with extrovert folk outside your immediate sub-field.

Umm, I just read this and I still didn't get what was so bad about her behavior. What exactly is a go-getter? Someone who does their best?
Are we now supposed to shun people who do their best and expect them to do worse just so we feel better about ourselves?
 
From what you said, it seems like her crimes include being a bit of introvert in her relationships with people and not comfortable with unsolicited sharing about herself , invests most of her time in her work because she doesn't have much else going on, seems to enjoy it and works hard at it, has body image issues, and crime of all crimes, she actually asks questions in most seminars and presentations (gasp!) I mean, what is world coming to when you can't even expect your fellow grad students not to ask questions during a dissertation so you don't look bad.
 
I think you hit the nail on the head in your last paragraph. I would review any claim of friendship that includes a supposed friend feeling better when I did worse. Maybe she can sense that and that's why she doesn't share things with you, so as not to alienate you. Maybe she's been through people alienating her because of her achievements before. There are a hundred different reasons that could explain her motivations that don't have to be about you. We all come with baggage.
 
My thoughts on collaboration and competition in any avenue in life: Collaborate. Compete. Do your best and may the best man/woman win. This is the concept of good sportsmanship and knowing that some people are going to be better at something and it has nothing to do with you. You shouldn't view them as villains because of it nor should you think less of yourself because of it. You're both doing your best and that's what counts. If you can't compete and remain friends with people you are more or less competing with (which is fine, a lot of people can't do both), then just avoid making friends with people you'll have to compete with for positions, grants, etc.

Why do you think political 'science' needs more mathematical rigor? I think it needs all kinds of different methodological rigor, but math is hardly the only game in town. Alas, we are all now unthinking KKV drones. All grad students should be made to read Patrick Thaddeus Jackson's book on Political Science and methods of inquiry.

Orlien, I was literally in the exact situation you're in. My advice is different from the other three posters here though, so obviously I'm not offering gospel. But it's noteworthy that my stats (both in PoliSci and overall) were far worse than yours: I graduated with a sub-3.0 GPA, got into a Top-30 program, and was offered a university fellowship at a 50-ish program. So it's not impossible, or maybe I was just lucky. 

What I can tell you is that it helped me to include it in my SOP, based on what I gathered from students/faculty at the school I accepted admission from. But I limited my mention of this to a single, tightly worded paragraph. I focused primarily on what I gained from Natural Science courses (e.g. scientific inquiry, research design, intellectual stimulation, work ethic, etc.), and framed it as "while I found myself drawn to the art of scientific inquiry, I learned the hard way that the natural sciences were not an area in which I could excel" (all of which is true!)... I also specifically referenced the grade discrepancy, and made mention of my motivation for taking natural science courses (to address concerns about my commitment to PoliSci). 
 
Again though, this was a single, small part of my SOP. I placed it within my SOP such that it wouldn't interfere with the main thrust of this document: in other words, I didn't harp on it, didn't try to explain it, just pointed it out and gave my brief thoughts on it, and moved on to focus on the rest of my experience/purpose. Basically, be honest, forthright, and concise about what you clearly (and rightfully) feel is an important anomaly to point out.

I did also talk to my LOR writers about including it; I haven't read the recommendations so I don't know what they did, but you can never go wrong with that. Feel free to PM me if you wanted some more specifics.

So let's say that you have multiple research interests in different categories (IR, CP, PT or AP)...How did you decided which one you would:

A. Write about in your SOP
B. Study Further in graduate school
C. Write your dissertation on

I have structured this question so pretty much everyone can respond somehow.

Also on a waitlist and haven't heard back.  Although I'm losing my mind and powers of concentration, I do understand why people might be taking long time to decide: humans tend to get paralyzed when faced with important decisions that requires parsing complex information.  
 
I do wish that these decisions were a bit more forthcoming- especially the ones I'm interested in, of course!
 
In the meanwhile, I feel like I should go participate in some sort of study about the neurological consequences of stress for prolonged periods of uncertain duration. If you put me in an MRI machine right now, the machine would probably just spit back a picture of a mushroom cloud.

I think that it shouldn't be a problem because you will re-enter the country with with your F-1.
 
I strongly suggest that you ask your International Students Office and the US consulate closest to you. Gather as much information as possible from official sources.

As a German, I disagree that FU is comparable to Top 75-100. It all depends on what you want to do, and where you want to end up, but in Europe, I would say that a degree from FU is worth a lot more than a degree from a Top 75-100 uni in the US. Rankings are flawed anyway, in particular because they only take into account English-speaking publications, which is not always the most relevant aside from the US. That said, I know people that have done PhDs in Germany (and not even at particularly famous/good German universities), and now have TT positions at reputable US institutions, both Research and Liberal Arts.
 
I would say, in terms of the quality of education and supervision, it depends a lot more on your advisor in the German system in general, since our PhDs don't include nearly as many classes.
 
Regarding TA ships: generally, many (most that want to stay in academia= people doing the individual PhD get a TA-ship, though others do get (external) scholarships, or do some other work (e.g. Think Tank). In Germany, a TA-ship often includes teaching undergraduate (and sometimes also graduate) classes by yourself, without any real supervision. Since most universities are public, there's a "labor agreement" specifying how much your hourly wage is etc. The important factor usually is whether you have a 50%/75% or 100% position. When thinking about German stipends, do take into account that cost of living is ridiculously low in many German cities and that you usually don't need a car because of excellent and affordable public transport. Still, you're not going to get rich of the stipend. Another thing in Germany is that many contracts will only be for 6 months/a year, which can make it hard to plan, especially if your position depends on external funding.
 
In Germany, there's no unified title for a PhD in Political Science (except that it's a doctor). I know some people who have a doctorate in Social Sciences, in Political Science, in International Relations etc.

This is a very personal decision that will come down to you and your wife weighing and comparing your priorities.  For me, this is truly the only career where I can visualize myself being happy for the next 40-50 years without dejectedly crossing off the days until the weekend, my next vacation, retirement, etc, so despite the tradeoffs, this was an easy decision for me.
 
I was advised not to pursue this by one of my LOR writers who shares your concerns, but I decided that you only live once and I didn't want to look back in 10, 20, 30 years with the regret of knowing that I never tried.  I decided that I would apply far and wide and attend the program that would best prepare me to get a desirable job in the end.  But everybody's definition of a "desirable" job is different.  I realize going into this that not everybody lands a TT at Stanford.  I'd love to land at an R1 flagship or large, prestigious private school, but I would also be happy at a mid-tier LAC if that's where I end up.  But not everybody would.  I'll be attending a top-15 that's top 10 in my subfield and it's my hope that if I work hard, publish, etc, that I'll land somewhere afterwards.
 
In my opinion, there are worse things than getting paid a modest stipend to live in a fun town with a low cost of living and young demographic for the next 5 years while I become an expert in my field and earn a debt-free PhD.  I'm 5 years out of undergrad, divorced, living in a small city where it seems that everyone else is over 40, and I've spent the past 5 years working at desk jobs from 8-5 every day.  So the changes that my life will undergo this August are very attractive to me, despite the fact that I'll need to make some lifestyle changes to make ends meet.
 
My income will be cut in half for the next 5 years, but I feel that's a small price to pay for the benefits of a great education and a career that won't make me feel like I've wasted my life doing some insipid job that eats my soul.  I have a number of friends who have said "well that sounds fun, but it's going to take 5 years?? Don't you just want to work and make money?"  Sounds like a recipe for long-term happiness if I ever heard one...
 
If you truly think that living in a small town will make you and your wife miserable, then perhaps you should consider re-applying.  5-6 years is a long time to hate where you live.  It would be terrible to drop out of your program halfway through because you were so unhappy.  On the plus side, however, small towns often have a more favorable stipend-to-cost of living ratio (not always true of course - Minneapolis, Nashville, Austin, etc are all quite affordable).  And attending a strong program in an undesirable city for 5 years might mean that you can land a job in a desirable location for the balance of your career. 
 
Whatever you choose, I wish you the best of luck in your decision.  I'm sure you'll get a lot of opinions and advice from your friends and family but only you can know what is best for you.  Good luck!

A lot of people have compared this process to dating, and the relationship with your adviser is similar to marriage. It makes sense that a lot of it will be based on gut. 
 
For me, I am trying to decide between two top 4 schools, and all of the objective criteria can be basically assumed to be the same, like funding, education and such. The biggest differences are the advisers and the projects, which comes down to which one I would enjoy the most, which comes from gut. You need to be with an adviser you like and treats you well, working on a project you are passionate about, in a city you enjoy. Otherwise, you won't be happy, and if you aren't happy you are likely to not complete your PhD.

For me they are research fit, funding, atmosphere (collaborative or cut-throat?), location and resources.

I had to visit and make a choice on schools twice -- in 2010 for a MSc in Canada and in 2012 for a PhD program. In both cases, I did not get the feeling that everyone was 100% right. I don't think I have ever visited a school and instantly knew "this is the right place for me". I did get the feeling that "oh this place is pretty nice" and over the following days/weeks (and after visiting a few more places) did that feeling grow from "I guess this is the best choice out of the ones I have" to "yes, I am really excited to do this next fall!"
 
It's always scary to start something new but you can't make progress without some risk/adventure. I'm not saying that everyone should go to grad school and that you should always take every risk. But, I think it's perfectly normal to not feel 100% sure / good about choosing a grad school / choosing to go to grad school! 

To all the international students! Don't give up! Despite a quite disadvantaged background (international, unknown school, different major), mediocre GRE scores and not perfect GPA, I managed to get into some of the top schools.
 
PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: non-ranked school in Latin America
Major: BA in Social Psychology
Undergrad GPA: 3.9
Type of Grad: mid-ranked school in Europe 
Major: MA in International Relations
Grad GPA: 3.5
GRE: 155V, 165Q, 3.0AW (AW is really embarrassing)
Any Special Courses: summer course (funded) at a top US school (during MA)
Letters of Recommendation: adviser from the grad school (non-polisci) + two star US profs from top schools (polisci)
Research Experience: 2 years of research assistance at the undergrad school + 1 year of research assistance at a well-known European research institute + several completed research projects + one mediocre non-polisci publication (peer-reviewed) + >10 conference presentations
Teaching Experience: One seminar
Subfield/Research Interests: Methodology, Comparative
Other: laureate of several national merit scholarships

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Yale $$, Rochester $$
Waitlists: NYU, Princeton
Rejections: all others (overall I applied to 15 top schools)
Going to: ?
 
LESSONS LEARNED:
 
It is very important for international students to receive good Quant GRE scores and get LORs from decent American profs (you can get to know them at conferences/summer schools/etc.) Great SOP, Research experience and LORs could save you almost no matter what But still you should spend more time on GRE Additionally, I wish I could spend more time on customizing my SOP for all the departments and prospective advisers. Fit really matters. Grade degradation (BA - 3.8, MA - 3.5) and change in major are no good  Applying to as many departments as possible really helps (of course, if you feel like you have at least a slight chance to get in)

Being in a very similar situation, I have had most of these thoughts as well! I am essentially doing what MacZeeZee suggested (although I didn't know there was a scientific term for that phenomenon!) and am trying to ignore my doubts. I tend to worry too much about everything in general, and I have been in so many situations where I was starting to regret decisions I had previously made (and quite enthusiastically too!). Fortunately, I never backed out of any of them and all experiences ended up being great, rewarding and enriching, so I am not going to listen to my doubts this time around either
 
Of course there is always a danger that things don't work out the way you had hoped, that you may not be successful or that you may have a rough time. I don't know if it's just me, but it always give me some strange sort of comfort to know that I can quit if I really can't do it anymore. You're not selling your body and soul to the university for the entire duration of the PhD program, and if for whatever reason you decide to not follow through with the whole thing, then you can get out. To me at least it's better to try (and not follow through) than to not even attempt something for fear of what may happen. I am sure that I would regret not starting the PhD program more than I would dropping out if I absolutely could not handle it. At least that way I would know that (as opposed to wonder if) a PhD is not for me - and I still would have gained knowledge and experience in the process.
 
As for going back home and visiting my family - I have my mind firmly set on making time for that. And if that means taking a little longer to complete the program, then so be it.

I suggest you look up the phenomenon known as "The Approach / Avoidance Conflict".  Just knowing this little tidbit about human behavior has allowed me to say "Yes" and "Why the Heck Not" to MANY more opportunities. 
 
Essentially, it refers to the fact that every major life event has both negative and positive attributes; for example, going to a PhD program will provide for numerous opportunities, it will enrich your life, let you meet new people....but it will also take you away from your home country, your family, not allow you to make very much money for a while, etc.  When a certain event (like starting grad school) is farther away, the positive aspects seems more relevant -- you tend to only think of the benefits. But as you actually get closer to having that goal become realized, the negative suddenly jump to the forefront of your mind. You begin to worry about how much you will miss out on, and you panic. 
 
For me, just realizing that these feelings are COMPLETELY normal and rational (even adaptive!), has helped me to see that these negative thoughts don't necessarily mean I should not move forward. They are just my anxieties coming to the surface, ready to be vanquished :-)
 
Hope it helps!  

Mm, I think "Don't bother going to a non-top-25 program" is just wrong. It's true that top programs fill a disproportionate number of the academic job slots out there, but as the author points out, those programs also produce a large percentage of people who don't finish and/or end up heading to the private sector. I don't think focusing on a concrete number will be very useful to you. I think you're better off asking for a complete list of placements in the last ten years and asking yourself how comfortable you'd be with a random draw from that pack. If the answer is "Not comfortable enough to devote six or seven years to it," do something else. For you, that line might be at 50, 25, or 10... or you might be interested in 15 but not in 12.
 
As to not going somewhere because of a specific faculty member: That sounds to me like committing suicide for fear of death. Yes, we move around a bit. Yes, people don't get tenure. But you can move too: we get a handful of applications from students at other institutions whose mentors have left or whose circumstances have changed and who would rather continue their program with us.
 
The main exception here is if you're trying to choose one very top school over another because an advanced junior faculty member fits your interests really well. The very top schools have a way of thinking, "We don't need to retain this person; if s/he does well after leaving here, we'll just hire him/her back." (I actually heard this, as a junior faculty member at Harvard. Started sending out job applications not long afterward.) Other than that, though, life's too short to try to second-guess where faculty will be a few years from now. If you've got concerns about a particular person, ask for a confidential answer to the question of whether they're likely to leave soon. I've done this when interviewing for faculty jobs, and the results were pretty surprising. In one case, I basically got, "As soon as I get an offer from one of the following x universities, I'm out of here," while another faculty member just said, "I'm going to die here."

While it is true that most people do not going into academia, I have run into a few professors who have told me that they feel like failures if their students don't go into academia (or, that this is the prevailing feeling of the program). I have also had interviews where PIs have been pretty snarky about the quality of work going on in industry and the people who end up there - which is awkward because I currently work in pharma. However, I've also had the opposite - professors who say the like it when students have goals other than academia, because most people will not be able to go that route.

Point being that this prejudice is probably pretty rare anymore, but it definitely still exists.

I would be upfront about your goals, only because that way your adviser can help you figure out what experiences would be most beneficial in helping you get the job you want. And, if you do find one of those people who isn't as supportive of your career goals, you'll want to know as early as possible so you can either switch advisers, or find other guidance within the department.

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Big state school
Major(s)/Minor(s): International Affairs & Economics (majors)/Russian Studies (minor)
Undergrad GPA: 3.89
GRE:  V:166 Q:159 AW:5.5
Any Special Courses: Not really
Letters of Recommendation: Three tenured professors—no one famous or anything   
Research Experience: None
Teaching Experience: Economics tutor (no experience teaching a class)
Subfield/Research Interests: IR/IPE
Other: I have a lot of language study in my background.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Rochester ($$) and UPenn ($$)
p.s. Why do we use two dollar signs? Why not one?
Waitlists: Not-a-one
Rejections: Um, a lot. 12, in fact. But all from really great programs that I certainly cannot blame for not taking me.   
Going to: Undecided
 
LESSONS LEARNED: Well, I second the advice about applying to a lot of schools. It is expensive and it is stressful. But the way I see it, if you only apply to programs you really respect and wish to be a part of, you only need one acceptance to make your dreams come true. There are so many factors we can't control. Make it easier on yourself by having 10 dream schools instead of one. I was so scared that applying directly out of undergrad with no research experience would write me off immediately. I could not be happier with my offers!
 
SOP:
            A NOTE: I feel a little embarrassed about sharing this. A lot of people feel the need to keep privacy here, but other than removing names of universities and professors and taking out the parts I added on a school-by-school basis, I wanted to give future applicants an unaltered example. (Though beware, future applicants, this is an example of mediocrity, I promise you.) Along the lines of lessons learned, I think I really should have started on my SOP sooner and re-drafted more. If I were applying again next year, I’d probably try to get rid of some of the background-y stuff and focus more on want I want to do in the future. Oh well. All’s well that ends well! Oh, and also, the research I proposed is not exactly IR, it’s more CP, but the professors I’ve talked to since getting accepted don’t seem to be bothered by overlapping/fluid research interests. Anyway, here it is:
 
            [Last year, my identity authorized me to live and study in 29 different countries. A German passport deserves credit for 26, the Schengen Area, and my American passport carried student visas for both Canada and Russia. As a citizen of America and a citizen of Europe, it was simple for me to acquire this priceless mobility clearance. That is, unearned privilege, bestowed upon me based on my citizenship, afforded me access to further privileges. This is not a revelation, but it has troubled me, and appears now as the foundation for my research interests. My passports protect me from the complications of borders.
 
            It is safe to say I have taken advantage of my opportunities to travel. I toured the railways of Europe and enjoyed a summer of white nights in St. Petersburg, but the two experiences I find most valuable were the ones that convinced me to change direction. I attended my first year of college at University X. I majored in biology—a decision that amuses those who know me now—but health problems prevented me from taking my final exams in the second semester, thus saving me from that dark path to medical school. Having been redirected but not quite sure where to go, I spent a year in Germany. I went to learn my father’s language and to allow myself time to evaluate a life dissociated from academia. In an intensive German language program, I achieved fluency in half a year. Languages, I discovered, come more easily to me than to most, but the real impetus for my progress was the rigor and focus of the work. My day was exercise and application, beginning with five hours of classes and persisting as I tried to order coffee or give directions or buy a train ticket. Evenings were for homework. I flourished. I came home in the spring and promptly enrolled for summer classes at University Y. German language would not be my main academic focus, but the discovery of an unexplored interest was invigorating, and I had learned something stirring and important about myself as well: I do best when I am fully immersed.
 
            My preoccupation with international relations began with economics. In a course on development economics, Professor X explained the potential failures of inequality scales, addressed the theories and realities of microfinance, and gave an overview of risk analysis in migration decisions. With these models, economics ceased to look like a flat but satisfying collection of abstractions. Instead of obscurity, I saw real-world application. Instead of sanitary models, I saw fallibility. Dissatisfaction was a thrill. My research interests emanate from the questions Professor X’s course taught me to ask. Political science courses then built me a framework for my new knowledge. A course on the international political economy helped unify my academic interests; remittances and the global terms of trade were topics that caught my attention best. Professor Y and his class on foreign policy provided the last piece of the puzzle: policy implications. Now I want all three. I want to learn to conduct research horizontally, cross-examining economic models and political theory with proposed and enacted policy.
 
            This returns me to the inherent privilege granted by American citizenship. The mobility I commanded a year ago is attributed to globalization, which has pleased efficiency-minded economists with its progress toward the free movement of goods and capital. Yet American citizenship is rare. Aside from exceptions like the Schengen Area, which makes my German passport so potent, the world is resisting advancement toward the free movement of labor. Migration marks an impasse at the confluence of economics, political science and state policy. Economics tells us that immigration is a natural market dynamic and a reaction to wage differentials, but that similarly-skilled workers and local government—the losers—will oppose it. Political science adds that sovereignty and borders are enmeshed, and that national identity is associated with ethnicity and that nebulous concept, culture. Policy obliges political leaders to weigh public opinion against economic gains, while legislators, in the American political system at least, are more likely to be subject to localities—the aforementioned losers. As a graduate student, I hope to address these relationships by looking more closely at assimilation. My first step would be to put parameters on what is now an amorphous notion; I want to conduct a comparative review of the measurement of assimilation, and to determine whether official gauges are commensurate with public perceptions. In terms of political theory, this project would involve the study of ethnic amalgamation, in which the working hypothesis would be that public expectations for assimilation can never be met. That is, as long as society A expects to subsume society B, the amalgam society C will always be perceived as transitional.
 
            With this application, I declare my intent to pursue a Ph.D. in Political Science with a concentration in the subfield of International Relations. I hope to use this education to obtain a position at a university or independent research institution that will allow me to conduct research and write on contemporary issues. While my greatest strength is writing, I also take pleasure in teaching, and believe that either type of institution would suit me well. I wish to emphasize my awareness of the dedication required to succeed in this program, and to express appreciation for the time afforded to review my application.]
 
Boy this post got long. Sorry guys!

Type of Undergrad Institution: A Swedish, regional university

Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science
Undergrad GPA: N/A (I still can't figure out how to convert it to American GPA)
Type of Grad: MA in Political Science from an American university
Grad GPA: 4.0
GRE: 168/153/5 (V/Q/AW)
Any Special Courses:
Letters of Recommendation: Tenured IR Professor with an endowed chair (former department head), Tenure-track IR professor, associate professor in CP (All of these are people I worked with in the MA program)
Research Experience:Two conference presentations, one summer and one semester as a research assistant, one article that is a work-in-progress together with a faculty member from my MA program
Teaching Experience: One semester as a teaching assistant, three semesters teaching individually while in the MA program. One year as an adjunct/lecturer.
Subfield/Research Interests: International Relations/War and Conflict
Other:

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Michigan State ($$) & University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ($$)
Waitlists:
Rejections: University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, Pennsylvania State University, Yale, Ohio State
Pending:
Going to: ??
 
LESSONS LEARNED: Oh dear, where to start? First, you are going to receive a lot of different advice during your application process and it might be difficult to sort out exactly what advice that you should take. There's good advice on this site, make sure you use it to your advantage. But be aware that what applies to one discipline doesn't have to be true for politicla science.
 
Second, one thing you definitely should do is to take advantage of your current professors. Ask if they know people at other institutions, what their graduate experience was like, and if they might be able to put in a good word for you. Some will do this, others will not. It all depends on the professor in question and you know your own professors better than I do.
 
Third, apply to a lot of programs. It might hurt your wallet, but do not limit yourself to 1-3 programs. I ended up applying to 7 programs and that might not even have been enough. The process is, to a certain extent, random. You are competing for a very limited number of slots against a ton of students who all have excellent qualifications and many excellent candidates will be rejected.
 
Fourth, If you want to find programs/institutions, use the NCR and the USNews rankings to find programs that might interest you. I started out with the top 100 programs from NCR and then eliminated programs based on location and fit. In the end, I had about 14-15 programs that I considered to be really good fits in locations where I could imagine living for 5-6 years. Then I made a last cut because of financial restraints, etc.
 

SOP: I'm not going to post my SOP (mainly because I think it's crap). Some advice though: You can't rewrite it too many times. I didn't rewrite it nearly enough or spend enough time on mine. I hate to so it, but I'm fairly sure that I would have been admitted to some of the schools that rejected me if I had spent more time on it. As others have, or will, tell you, the SOP is the one thing over which you have complete control. You want to send strong signals to the people reading it that you know what you're getting yourself into, that you have a clear idea about what you want to do, and that you are good fit for the department to which you're applying.
 
Good luck, and have a happy time applying!