goforbroke33

I've thought about this as well. I would say it's to some extent a function of the departmental culture (which is of course hard for all of us to assay before having visited!), but I am thinking of erring more toward the casual side than the formal side of things. A nice (read: collared and pressed) shirt and jeans/slacks with dress shoes should be fine. As a guy, I'm not going to wear a suit, though some certainly will. As someone mentioned elsewhere, political scientists aren't known for being fashion forward, and although we've already been admitted, first impressions do still matter--big time. Some might consider my opinions to be in poor taste, especially since I'm electing to forgo a suit, tie, and the like, but I'd rather avoid haughtiness and be myself while meeting with potential advisors and committee members.

+1 Well said.

Same here. Did you ask to be considered for the MA in the event that you weren't accepted to the PhD program? I did (thinking "why not?") and am curious whether that has something to do with it. The big question is: are there people out where who asked to be considered for the MA program and have been notified via email of being rejected to the PhD program? If so, it's possible they may have 1-2 more admits or a soft waitlist. Optimism is the name of the game, at least as I see it, even if their open house is coming up soon.

Alright, compadres: who else has yet to hear anything--one way or the other--from UC Berkeley? I'm one of those who is still in purgatory here. While we know that speculating and assuming rarely pays dividends (at least in the realm of graduate admissions), does anyone have any idea about what's going on? As we had discussed yesterday, they might be slow in rejecting some of us, but they may also be working on a short waitlist and/or have the capacity to admit another student or three. Even better--does anyone have any inside information?

I'm in the same boat as you. I just checked the website, and nothing has changed since I submited the application. I also have not received any email. It's possible they haven't gotten around to telling us yet or are doing their rejections in waves (a la Michigan), but they may be working out a waitlist or 1-2 possible additional admits. Given that you've been accepted to some other very good programs, I would say that either of the latter options is possible, even if it's more likely that Berkeley is not in the cards for anyone who hasn't heard by now.

Given the lack of seriousness in the comments, the fact that no one else claimed admits from either school today, that the poster did not say anything on this board, and the absolutely terrible odds of being accepted to both--in the same day and with "lots of money"--I highly doubt the posting is genuine. All of us know too well how easy it is for a troll to mess with the board and, by extension, our heads. I wouldn't be well moved too much by it.

+1

There's another point to consider here. While it has suffered a bit in the last decade for many of the same reasons that UC Berkeley has, the University of Minnesota had been top 10 (or even top 8) from as far back as I've seen rankings, which is from the early 1950s, until it dropped into the top 15 and then 20 sometime in the late 1980s or 1990s.

Most of us have either been rejected (me) or accepted. According to their graduate coordinator, all applicants were supposed to have heard by Wednesday. I would email the department or give them a call. No news is better than a flat-out rejection, at least in a sense.

This process has indeed been grueling, exhausting, frustrating, and anxiety-inducing for all of us. Sometimes the effects of randomness and the stochastic nature of the admissions process causes highly-qualified and motivated candidates to strike out during a particular cycle. We could debate at length the role of "fit" as well as the value in contacting a POI before applying. From what I've gathered throughout the last year or so, fit only seems to matter with certain programs, though it's hard to say exactly which. A given department's size, pedigree, subfield needs, composition of the adcomm, etc. could all impact the relative importance of fit. As far as contacting POIs, I've heard both sides. For what it's worth, I did not contact any, after a lot of discussion with my undergrad advisors and a lot of internal debate. I was rejected by a couple schools I would have been thrilled to attend (and have of course asked myself many times why I didn't contact any POIs at these schools), but am happy to have been admitted to two great programs thus far. I wouldn't try to analyze too much after the fact. There are too many variables. Someone mentioned a few posts back that one application at a given department could be rejected one year and admitted the next. All of us, myself included, could heed the advice of William James, who warned about holding too much "antipathy to the idea of chance."

If that's the case, it's too bad, but I got a different impression upon emailing the department on Monday. I think we have yet to see at least a few accepts. Likewise, there are only 7 accepts on the board thus far. While that board is not omniscient, and things may vary from season to season, the last three years have seen a total of 11-15 admits (plus waitlisted candidates) on the board, all spread out over several days. Stay optimistic, folks.

You got that right! Although I'd assume that anyone who applied to two of them or to all three would be ecstatic to be admitted to "just" one, even if he/she were to get shot down by the other two. That's one way to keep the Ivy/HYP rivalries going, I suppose. Edit: grammar

Very well. Thanks for the inside info!

I am by no means questioning the veracity of this statement, but just for the record, would you share your source? I'm off to the bar for the evening, and will NOT be checking Grad Cafe on my phone, as great as the site is.

We really have no idea about the intricacies of their admissions process. Sure, we can look at historical info to try to get some sense of who they admit when and why they admit given students in a particular fashion (randomly, by subfield, by where their name is in the pile, or by some preference matrix), but it's entirely conjecture and speculation. Stanford has rolled their calls (and/or emails) over a few days in the past, have they not? I'm in the same boat as you; let's bank on hearing good news tomorrow! That'd be a wonderful way to start the weekend.