ampersand

I'm speaking as someone who's going directly into a political science PhD after a bachelor's and a year of work experience. I think that if you have the qualifications to go directly into a PhD and you know it's what you want to do, then go ahead and do it. However, if you need to shore up some of your qualifications (low undergrad GPA, no research experience, etc.) or if you're not sure whether a PhD is right for you, then look at doing a master's first. Master's degrees are less likely to be funded, but if you find out that you don't like graduate work, it's a much lower time investment. As to which schools to apply to for a master's, it's difficult to give you advice on that without knowing your subfield and research interests.

Sheesh, taking the GRE and sending the scores was almost as expensive as the application fees for me. A 33% fee increase? Rip-off. Even more reason to start looking at programs early so you can send your scores to a few schools for free when you take the test.

In my opinion, you shouldn't have done it. I'm willing to bet that at the next conference the adcom members are at, they'll tell everyone about that one kid who had the nerve to ask for their application money back, and they'll probably be making jokes at your expense.

For those who have formally accepted at UCSD: have you heard anything from the department yet? I accepted over the website, but am not sure if I should have let the DGS or someone else know about my decision. I'm not sure what should be happening at this point in terms of communication, so if anyone can let me know if would be greatly appreciated.

Sometimes schools sent out letters at a glacial pace. I just got my official rejection letter from a school yesterday (I'd already found out via the website that I was rejected). The letter was dated March 21, and I received it April 21. It didn't even have to go overseas or anything.

What they told me at the open house was that they offer enough methodology courses that everyone can qualify for a methods subfield; they just don't offer it outright.

I'm going to UCSD in American politics, studying political behavior. Since they don't offer methods as a subfield, I'll probably do comparative politics as well. Good luck to everyone on the board!

*

Me!

Just for your peace of mind, I would call them and see what your status is. That's really odd that you never got any sort of communication from them. Was your application complete?

All this talk of good food is making me wish I'd applied to UIUC...

When I was on a recruitment trip, a professor told me that jobs for Americanists are more plentiful now because many of the professors who were hired in the big higher education expansion of the 1960s are now retiring. Make of that what you will.

Hold off on making any decisions until you visit UT. Once you have, you'll have a better feel for how each department runs. Who knows, you might like them just as much as WashU.

Wow, realist is really getting dumped on here. Let me try an analogy out on you guys. When people vote, they use political parties as a shortcut to cue them into what a candidate's positions are. If a voter is Republican and they have a choice between a Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, and Green candidate, they will most likely vote for the Republican because the party label signals to them that they have similar beliefs. It's an easy way of finding out what the candidates believe without having to research every single one of them. It's similar to what hiring committees do. They may get hundreds of applications for a single position, and each file will get probably 30 seconds of review during the first round. When these committees see an applicant with a degree from a #5 ranked school, it signals to them that the applicant has had better training than the applicant from the #70 school, and the former applicant is most likely to get closer review. Your school's ranking is a quick shortcut to figuring out the quality of your education. As one of my mentors put it to me, a degree from a top school won't automatically get you a job, but your file is more likely to be looked at closely.

MVC, When I had my first meetings with profs last week, I kind of went into it blindly. I'm sure I looked a little foolish during my first couple of meetings, but I got the hang of it. So here's what I wish I would have done. Remember that these meetings are for a chance the school to sell itself to you--they already saw your file and accepted you, so this is a chance to get your questions answered and see whether this school is a place you'd be happy at for the next 5-8 years. I'd recommend knowing ahead of time who you want to talk to, and make sure you do a little homework on the people you'll be meeting. You should at least scan their CV a couple days before, and maybe make yourself a cheat sheet with their research interests and any publications/papers you find interesting. Most professors like to talk about themselves and their research, so it usually isn't too much of a problem to keep the conversation going. You should also be prepared to discuss your background and research a little. I'd err on the side of honesty in these meetings--be upfront about what you're expecting to get out of your education, what you want to study, and what your other options are in terms of other schools you've been accepted to. Some professors will want to get you to their schools at all costs, but most others will be more honest about whether you'd like their school. You shouldn't be so deferential that you kiss their behinds, but don't be pompous and big-headed either. Find a happy medium where you're collegial but still respectful. Mirror the professor's behavior--if they crack jokes, then you're probably okay to do it too. Also, bring along some paper and a pen if you think you need to take notes. I think that business casual dress is the accepted norm for these recruiting days. Slacks and a collared shirt would be appropriate. Ammar, I'd also advise against the wallflower strategy (this is coming from someone who's usually very introverted, especially with people I'm not used to). Political science has a lot of very outgoing people with big personalities, so if you don't learn to stand up every once in a while and have some confidence in your abilities then you're going to get swallowed up in the crowd and miss out on a lot of great opportunities. I would recommend sending some friendly emails to professors saying that you're going to attend the recruiting days, you're interested in the research they do, and you hope to get a chance to talk when you're at the school. As long as you're friendly to the professors when you meet with them, I don't think you'll tank any chance you have of working with them. They understand that these meetings can be stressful and overwhelming for new students, and they'll cut you a little slack. That was a lot of advice, but I hope you all find it helpful.

I went to the political science recruiting day last week and stayed with a couple of current grad students. They live in a graduate housing complex called Miramar, and from what they said it's pretty easy for first-year grad students to get in there (they recommended putting in an application as soon as you decide you're going to go there). The rent is about $650-$700 per month, unfurnished, two bedrooms/two bathrooms (although one of the bathrooms has a toilet and the other has a shower...a little weird). The complex was just built in the last couple of years, so everything's pretty new. There's also a shuttle stop nearby. It seems like a good option for at least the first year, since it's close to campus and relatively cheap.

Congrats, VandyCandy! I know you really wanted it. I just got my acceptance, too.

This is just my impression...I think that 1320 combined is a little on the low side, although it would help to know how it breaks out between verbal and quantitative. 6.0 AW is excellent. Of course, high GRE scores alone aren't enough to get you into a top school.

I've been checking it at least twice a day since about Tuesday, but there's still no decision posted. I guess I'll assume that no news is good news at this point.

In case anyone else is still waiting to hear from them, this is what I've heard from a couple of people who are students there now: Michigan has a lot less money this cycle, what with their economy in the toilet and all, so their incoming class is going to be very small this year. I think they've been taking so long to notify everyone because they've been waiting to know how much money they've got to offer. Personally, I haven't heard a blessed thing from them yet, so I'm still going to hold out hope, however irrational that might be.

I'll be at the open house, too. See you there, letmein.

I think you've hit on a great source of additional income. I think we've already proved that we're all obsessive enough that we'd engage in betting on notification dates. As for when Michigan decides to send out notifications, who knows. Have they sent out all their acceptances already? I'm near the point of not really even caring whether they accept me or not. I just want to hear from all my schools so I can start deciding where I want to go.

Anyone want to volunteer to take one for the team and call Michigan to see when the eff they're going to make their decisions?

I think the reason that so many of us are hung up on the Top-25 thing is that a lot of us are now being slapped with rejections from many of those schools, and we're desperate to convince ourselves that whatever other schools took us are still good schools that will give us good training that will land us tenure-track jobs. When faced with uncertainty, we want cold, hard numbers to reassure us.

I guess each department is probably free to set their own recruiting days. It would be a little odd to have hundreds of prospective graduate students descend as a horde on the campus all at the same time.