confusedalien

All, many thanks for the replies. Looking back now there are a few things that I would have done differently, but I don't think any of them are sufficiently important to torpedo my chances - and at any rate, it's too late now! Best of luck to everyone, and thanks again for your time and input.

Hi everyone, I'm a bit of a long time lurker and I was hoping that you might be able to share your collective wisdom on a few issues. I am not an American, so I'm sorry if these questions are assumed knowledge in the US. I've been selected by the Fulbright commission in my country for a scholarship. This will essentially fund a living stipend for one year of Ph.D. study at a US university. One of the conditions of this scholarship is that at the conclusion of my Ph.D. study, I have to return home. In other words, I won't be able to work at a US university once I have finished the Ph.D. My questions are: 1. How much of a 'wow factor' would be attached to the Fulbright scholarship? I'm not trying to humblebrag here - the scholarship (though prestigious in its own way) is not particularly well known in my country, but I understand it might be a bigger deal in the USA. It is hard for me to judge what effect the scholarship might have on my admissions prospects. 2. Any speculation on how an admissions committee might view the fact that I cannot stay in the USA at the completion of my degree? I.e. I won't be moving to a top 20 school and thus building on the university's placement record. Some of the comments on gradcafe suggest that admissions committees are looking only to admit people who can graduate in five years, and then secure a tenure track position at a top 20 uni (therefore making the Ph.D. school's placement record look great). A more likely career path for me is to return to my country and work for the Government, or perhaps teach at one of the country's best universities. 3. Might the fact that I have a living stipend for a year actually make me a harder candidate to admit? This sounds counter-intuitive, but it might mean that a Department has to juggle some money around to fund four years, instead of the normal five? Or instead of funding me normally they might seek to fund my position through non-departmental fellowships (or similar). Some non-scholarship questions: 4. What GPA equivalent would a MA with First Class Honours be in the American system? I had to work very hard to get this in my country, but I'm worried it might not be appreciated by an adcom who is used to GPA scores. 5. Does anyone know if adcoms make some allowance for the fact that many countries do not have a heavy quantitative focus in the pol sci area? In my country, no-one does quant. I haven't touched maths since leaving high school, hence my Q score of 156. I am a bit worried that this was a real weak point in my application. For context, I have applied to a few top-10 schools, and a couple of more policy-focussed schools in the top 50. Any input is appreciated. Thanks!