cooperstreet

What political theorists do you like that do marxism? Check their programs.

No. If I wanted to work at a think tank, I'd get a MPP

I was just about to say exactly what DKSL said. 1 person does not a committee make.

"It does not show in the rankings but I read some good reviews about the politics division. " Unless those reviews are, "I WENT HERE AND NOW I HAVE A GREAT JOB" then they don't matter.

In practice, it is probably an epiphenomenon

One question, would signaling (I assume there is an area where you can identify this on the application) that you don't need funding help with admissions at all? yes

I had a 3.09. You're fine.

Yeah uh, most people don't have publications. Your UGPA is fine, but your graduate GPA is a little low. Try and get it up as much as possible. Stop worrying about your numbers and start worring about your research interests. You say: "Research Interest: I would like to focus my research and studies in the ex-USSR countries." What type of research? what type of questions will you be asking? You mention UPenn. Who do you intend to work with there? These are more important thant 3.xxxx or Q/V/AW

Yeah what kameldinho said. More importantly though, is why do you want to earn a PhD? I mean, why do you want to spend the rest of your life doing research? Instead of getting a full blown masters, you could take math CC courses, and maybe a graduate political science seminar at the best local university. That could save you money and give you the opportunity to do actual research.

You're fine. What's your ug gpa?

K. Lance I think you'll be fine. I would bet every adcom has experience evaluating applications from people who have law degrees and transcripts from a law school, and they know the grading scale is different.

Is that a yes to the US scale? In that case a 3.3 graduate GPA is really going to hurt you. A 'B'grade in a graduate class does not look good--why would adcoms admit someone who they know may be getting Bs in their PhD program? If there are extentuating circumstances I would have your LORs mention them.

That 3.3 is going to be your graduate GPA in political science? Is that on the US scale?

" I am currently looking into Political Science PHD programs." "Hoping to ultimately work as a Foreign Service Officer, Think Tanker, or at an NGO." These don't jibe. Don't get a PhD if that is what you want to do for a living. Why do you want to get a PhD? But since you asked... Looking at your information, I would honestly get the impression that you are an overachiever. Which is fine, but a PhD adcom is going to want to see a bit of individuality and personality in your statement, so make sure YOU don't hide yourself from your SOP. You say you are conversational in Arabic. How many classes have you taken and have you studied abroad and for how long? Honestly when I see a lot of elementary languages listed, what comes to my mind is someone who took a semester or two, knows the alphabet and some words/grammar, and puts it on their resume. You don't want to look like that.

Quit worrying about your GPA. You are fine. Continue to kill it. People will understand you were 18 once. Dude/dudette, I had a 3.09. I suggest you start focusing more on math. Take calculus courses. Ideally, take a linear algebra course. If you kick ass in those, you should be well suited to apply. And keep reading.

I think the pushback is not against transferring to a 'better' program, but enrolling in a program with the intention of leaving after getting your MA. I think those are two different things.

Also, for more background, see these threads: Quote: "My adviser and colleagues are so cool. I couldn't imagine doing this to them. A PhD is a very "personal" thing. I'd feel very manipulative and I would feel like I was letting the team down if I dropped out. The process is tough for us students, but it is also tough for advisers: they are putting time, money, and energy into us. We take a gamble on picking a school, hoping that our advisers are supportive of our ideas, and at the same time, our advisers are taking a gamble on us. Before starting my PhD program I would have been cool with this, but now that I know what it is like, I wouldn't recommend others try a stunt like this. It's a real jerk move. " Choice quote from the second thread: "This gets asked all the time on these boards, you should check out past topics. My personal feelings, along with the consensus on these forums, is that this is generally a bad thing to do. You will definitely burn bridges and make things complicated for yourself. Do you think your adviser at the 1st university would really write you a strong LOR for the 2nd university? How would you explain yourself in your SOP for the 2nd application? You are clearly going to have to show you enrolled into a PhD program and then quit. How excited do you think the 2nd school will be about taking someone on who has already done that once?" Choice quote: "This is more from my personal view and other fellow grad student views as I have not discussed it with professors, but I believe it is generally frowned upon to leave the PhD program after getting your Masters. I think you are potentially blackballing yourself from academia. It basically just looks like you wanted to come in and get a free Masters and then leave. You waste the school's time and your adviser's time and worst of all you take another potential student's spot that legitimately wants to go there. I would also think that any future schools would be very cautious with your application since you went to another school and left after a Masters. In their eyes, they might think you would just do that again. I would also think your adviser would not write you the best LOR. Imagine if your were the advisor, you are doing work you are proud of, building up good relationships, and then you find out one of your students never wanted to be in your lab to begin with and then they want to leave for another university which basically means they used you to get a Masters, and then they ask you for a letter of rec? Sorry if this sounds harsh, but I am against the attitude of accepting a PhD spot with no intention of finishing. If you like the school you are accepted to and you like the work they are doing, you should go there and be happy. "

which is not analogous, what would be analogous is to take a job with an extended training period, and leave immediately after that training period. I know for a fact that new nurses train often are trained for six months, and if a nurse got hired, received that training, and left for a higher paying position immediately after that training was completed, they would quickly create a bad name for themselves.

Is it unethical and bad form in any business to accept a remunerative position under false pretenses, the academy is no different. FFS, its frowned upon in the legal profession.

Excuse me?

Yeah, if you are transferring because a place is a better fit, your current institution doesn't have money, your SO wants to move, you want to be closer to family, etc. etc., no one has a legitimate grievance against you. However, if you leave after your MA and never ended to progress past that point, after people funded you, trained you, befriended you, and advised you, all under the pretense that you wanted to be there and intended to stay,then yeah, I can see how people would be pissed.

Applying to, accepting, and attending a funded Ph.D. program with the intention of never completing the degree and to leave after you earn an MA is deceitful and unethical. Taking that spot from someone who actually wants it is no good for anyone. Others may disagree, but I don't know who they are. One, you don't know me. Two, please be professional. Thanks.

In IR its international organization, international studies quarterly, international security, world politics

This is highly unethical.

TT R1! But any job will do. In a nice area.