TheGnome

I did not mean it to be taken too seriously, but I guess my point was to give a sample of schools that you are applying to - one or two higher ranked, X, and one or two lower ranked.
 
 
Loric, cut people some slack will you. No offense, but your tone sounds a bit accusatory. Anyone can have any set of reasons to consider which schools to apply, and can rank them in any way they like in their minds. If you have a suggestion for our friend here, I believe there are more amicable ways to drop your nuggets of wisdom.
 
Also, this issue is not nearly as important as much of the comments on this thread suggest.

In the last two years I've been a PhD student, I think what I've learned about this whole question is that the PhD is a very individual process. Even placements can be very deceptive because they may differ depending on the field you choose to specialize in. I.e., your program may place some methods grads in great places, but its IR program is sub-par and struggles to do so. In addition, placement depends on the dissertation you choose to undertake. A well-done, relevant research program will probably get you a job even if you are at a lower-ranked school. On the other hand, having crappy research from a top school will still be a tough sell even if you have a name brand degree. Professors aren't idiots; they don't just hire people based on where they went to school. Let's just say there's a high correlation between where you went to school and the quality of research you do.
 
Second, its not just the ranking of the program, its the resources that the program offers. This is where the Ivies and other private schools can really out-do state colleges. Having a good bank of internal funding for research along with other internal opportunities is a huge boon to a grad student because its hard to establish your name in the field without a prior track record. As another poster mentioned, you may well change your ideas concerning what you want to research when you're in the program, but large and well-funded programs tend to have opportunities regardless of the direction you go in.
 
So can you go to a smaller program and still graduate and get a good job? Absolutely. Remember that there is a huge selection bias problem in evaluating graduate programs. The graduates of Harvard self-selected to apply and were further selected on some kind of hopefully meritocratic criteria. You cannot compare the outcomes of Harvard/Stanford/etc. v. lower-ranked schools because the students are not equal across programs. In other words, the reason they do so well is not just because they have more profs in more subfields, its also the training and talent they bring into the program, which is much harder to measure. (C'mon, fellow grad students, this is the basics of the fundamental problem of causal inference...)
 
If you attend a less well-known program but work hard and are willing to teach yourself things that other grad students get in class and from faculty, then yes you can do it. I've met plenty of people who have. But its going to be up to be much more up to you and how you can make opportunities for yourself. If that challenge intimidates you, remember that there are jobs for Poli Sci PhDs outside the academy. You can get a PhD from a lower-ranked school and  have a very satisfying career doing really cool things even if you can't crack the tenure track door.
 
Feel free to PM me if you're making choices about "lower-ranked" programs.

It happens. If you have other offers from roughly comparable or higher ranked schools, you should try it. Worst case scenario is that they will say no. There is no shame in accepting the offer if they say no, and no shame in rejecting it if they say yes. As long as you do what you do in good faith, you need to pursue what is best for you. Grad Directors know that, and since they also want to get the best students they can, they will help you if it is in their power. In a sense, negotiating is actually mutually beneficial. 
 
You just need to remember that it might just not be possible for the DGS to make adjustments on the offer, so don't take it personal if negotiating gets you nowhere. 

I just got accepted from UNC Chapel Hill. I'm so excited!! This is my second cycle, so after a whole lot of rejections, an acceptance from a great program feels really surreal
 

First PhD acceptance! Email from Texas A&M Prof. to IR admits (11 admits). 
 
Can say I honestly wouldn't have been accepted without the help of many people on this forum and the advice passed down over the years.
 
Thanks GradCafe

The only publications that really matter are the ones in peer-reviewed political science journals that people have heard about. It is extremely rare to see this in an applicant file (though you might try your chance with BFB to get an actually informed answer). I'd say even the majority of ABDs on the job market doesn't have that. If you are one of the few who has a *real* publication, that is great. If you don't, I wouldn't worry about it at all. 
 
Also good luck to this year's hopefuls. It will be over before you know it

I think it's interesting how the public-private thing plays out across social sciences.  It really isn't that big of a deal, but it's not-a-big-deal-ness varies a bit across disciplines.  Think about a discipline generally more liberal than our own (like sociology) or one more conservative than our own (like economics).  I'm painting with really broad brushstrokes here, by the way.
 
Anyway, I took some US News data for the top 50 or so schools in each discipline and made this plot.  Note that the divide is stronger in econ than it is in polisci, and that the divide in polisci is stronger than the divide in sociology.  Nothing to hang your hat on; just good water cooler talk.
 

I would say: It is not inappropriate, but it is also not necessary at all. People who contacted faculty members and got good results tend to say that it helped, and those who contacted them and didn't get good results tend to say it doesn't help. I personally don't think it is something you should worry about. Unless you really do have a question, or have something meaningful to say, the e-mail exchanges (if you got a reply that is) do not amount to anything. 
 
a brief post by Penelope on this topic, a faculty member who writes in this forum.

I certainly wouldn't. Most of the top-tier think tanks in Washington require a Ph.D. for full research positions. And many of the top political appointees (especially in IR) are coming from those think tanks and have PhDs. Don't do a MPP unless you want to be a bureaucrat. 
 
To answer the OP, I think it's somewhat taboo to admit, which is why nobody here is going to speak up. But on one of my visits to a T-5 program last week, this notion was openly discussed and there was a sense that working at a think tank would put your PhD to good use.
 
Not sure what else you're looking for in an answer here. 

I would say: It is not inappropriate, but it is also not necessary at all. People who contacted faculty members and got good results tend to say that it helped, and those who contacted them and didn't get good results tend to say it doesn't help. I personally don't think it is something you should worry about. Unless you really do have a question, or have something meaningful to say, the e-mail exchanges (if you got a reply that is) do not amount to anything. 
 
a brief post by Penelope on this topic, a faculty member who writes in this forum.

So everyone is not entitled to their opinions then? I thought I was entitled to mine! Damn. Now I am curious who is entitled to my opinion..

I don't want to get into this argument. All the ethics talk is scary.
 
However, I do want to emphasize for the future applicants reading these pages who are thinking of transferring (and who may be stressing out): It is OK. It is common. Faculty members at your institution and at the schools you will apply encounter this kind of stuff all the time. I am just a lowly grad student who is about to become -yet again- a lowly grad student, so my perspective is obviously limited. Still, if you have concerns and want to talk about it, feel free to PM me now or in the future. I would be happy to offer my two cents.

I don't want to get into this argument. All the ethics talk is scary.
 
However, I do want to emphasize for the future applicants reading these pages who are thinking of transferring (and who may be stressing out): It is OK. It is common. Faculty members at your institution and at the schools you will apply encounter this kind of stuff all the time. I am just a lowly grad student who is about to become -yet again- a lowly grad student, so my perspective is obviously limited. Still, if you have concerns and want to talk about it, feel free to PM me now or in the future. I would be happy to offer my two cents.

I got my PhD from a small department where transferring was rare (though did happen) and work at one where transferring is pretty common.  You run into the occasional faculty member that gets offended, but most folks I've met understand these decisions.  It can be comparable to changing advisers or committee members in that respect.  Read the room first, but at the end of the day you need to do what's best for you. 

I don't want to get into this argument. All the ethics talk is scary.
 
However, I do want to emphasize for the future applicants reading these pages who are thinking of transferring (and who may be stressing out): It is OK. It is common. Faculty members at your institution and at the schools you will apply encounter this kind of stuff all the time. I am just a lowly grad student who is about to become -yet again- a lowly grad student, so my perspective is obviously limited. Still, if you have concerns and want to talk about it, feel free to PM me now or in the future. I would be happy to offer my two cents.

I don't want to get into this argument. All the ethics talk is scary.
 
However, I do want to emphasize for the future applicants reading these pages who are thinking of transferring (and who may be stressing out): It is OK. It is common. Faculty members at your institution and at the schools you will apply encounter this kind of stuff all the time. I am just a lowly grad student who is about to become -yet again- a lowly grad student, so my perspective is obviously limited. Still, if you have concerns and want to talk about it, feel free to PM me now or in the future. I would be happy to offer my two cents.

I don't want to get into this argument. All the ethics talk is scary.
 
However, I do want to emphasize for the future applicants reading these pages who are thinking of transferring (and who may be stressing out): It is OK. It is common. Faculty members at your institution and at the schools you will apply encounter this kind of stuff all the time. I am just a lowly grad student who is about to become -yet again- a lowly grad student, so my perspective is obviously limited. Still, if you have concerns and want to talk about it, feel free to PM me now or in the future. I would be happy to offer my two cents.

I've advised students who have transferred for a variety of reasons, including opting for better funding, a better ranked program, and a group of faculty that better suited their interests. I've got no hard feelings about it at all. If they're happier, I'm happy. More relevant than my own personal views is the fact that I've seen job applications that include letters of recommendation from two different departments because the applicant has transferred in the course of their graduate training while keeping a close relationship with faculty at the school they left. So while people may have different views about this personally, I think the disciplinary norms are not as strong as some posters on here suggest.

South Bend isn't that bad, I hear

Great post though. I'm glad this has become a venue for your sentimentality. I suspect things will change less than you think they have to. Who has time for ironing?

I like the parts where, like, somebody says "hey, I got into Harvard!" and then everybody else is like "oh, man, that's great that you got into Harvard!"  Or, like, the parts where somebody hasn't gotten in anywhere and has been depressed but then they get in somewhere and they're like "hey, I hadn't gotten in anywhere and had been depressed but now I got in somewhere!" and then everybody else is like "oh, man, that's great that you got in somewhere!"  Or, like, the parts where somebody is like "Hey, should I mention my mother's pasta e fagioli in my SoP?" and then somebody else is like "YMMV, but I mentioned my mom's pasta e fagioli in my SoP last year and didn't get in anywhere, but this year I didn't mention pasta e fagioli and got in places, so by Mill's method...."  Or like, I like the parts where people are like "Hey what books should I be reading next year?" and then other people are like "oh, you should probably be reading this book and that book" but then I'm like "you should probably be getting drunk with your old friends before you make new grad student friends that are bad drinkers." 
 
I really like this new thing where people are like "Don't be a jerk!"  And they're all like "hey, one reason to not be a jerk is that coach said not to be a jerk!"  As if they were going to be jerks if I hadn't said anything.  I get to be a treatment in a Rubin model.  It is very flattering, even if it is just pretend-mattering.  Hey, that rhymed.
 
Apparently I also like typing with the comedic timing of Mitch Hedberg.
 
I do not like the heavy.  This is probably related to the fact that I also am kind of sad that I won't get to be a dumb grad student next year; even though I will no more intelligent or accomplished or well-paid than I am now (which is nil on all dimensions), I will have to kind of pretend to be a grown up.  It's kind of making me sad.  I hope you guys will take advantage of getting to be dumb grad students.  You won't have to iron or tuck in your shirts.  You'll get to sit around and brainstorm and woodshop and spitball and mix it up and make it happen and stir the pot and take the time to really learn the deep, substantive meaning of the Lagrangian multiplier and reading Rousseau and saying "hey it would be cool to model the Lawgiver" because that's a fun idea that you get to have when you're a dumb grad student and maybe you'll even think you did something really novel and interesting only to find out that Abraham Wald did it a kajillion years ago or that Daron Acemoglu had six working papers on the topic when he was 12 and all of them turned into Econometricas and you don't know if that should make you feel good or bad or scared on a dimension so much deeper and more existential than regular fear that "scared" probably isn't the right word and next thing you know you'll be worried about your diction even though it is the least important part of any of this.  I will be working on not swearing and not making jokes about Father O'Malley or "the old bestiality days."  No longer will be I able to teach students about exogenous shocks by describing punching a guy in the stomach so hard that he poops himself.  Allofasudden, I will have to be the good cop, and all of you guys will get to be the bad cops, skillfully trained in breaking down every argument, every research design, every set of assumptions, every data set.  I already miss being a grad student.
 
It is also sad that the NIT games tonight were so bad that I found myself saying "hot damn!  I wonder if Property Brothers is on."  It was.
 
Not too many of you have met me, though I've been on here a long time.  I suspect I will continue to come on even though I am old and grizzled and constantly crippled and lacking in hair.  Some of the talk today was heavy and I didn't like it because I like thinking about rainbows and sunshine and whether the composition of an arbitrary set of correspondences is upper hemi-continuous.  But one thing did kind of make me sad for other reasons.  Those few of you that have met me could probably surmise that I think loyalty is cool or at least that I think effort put into my friends and colleagues and the department itself is not effort wasted.  It's cool with your friends and with your colleagues and with your professors and with the younger grad students and even with the Pleges [sik] and with the secretaries and with the janitor lady that really gets glad when you take the time to ask how she's doing and even with the undergrads that try so hard on a daily basis to suck your brain from your skull and your soul from your heart.  This is not a business that rewards loyalty, which is kind of a bummer.  I am not trying to say that it is such a business, or even that such a business exists.  It probably doesn't.  You must be your own advocate, from supporting your own ideas in contentious advising meetings to writing in a clear, confident prose to choosing the best situation for yourself to being willing to negotiate politely and humbly and unjerkily.  But in the course of your career you will make many decisions, and some will be good and some will be bad and some will not be entirely clear and I would like to think that some sense of community matters.
 
I should note that this ramble was written with an intentional style and was influenced only by the impeccable fixing-up skills of the aforementioned Property Brothers and perhaps also to the squawking of Mingus albums playing in the background.  To the best of my knowledge all of the numerous subject-verb dyads above feature correct conjugations which should serve as an indicator of sobriety and attention to detail and craftsmanship.  The aim here was to reduce the heavy, which to my eye has been done competently though inelegantly and self-indulgently.  You all seem like good enough people to be willing to take on those costs in the name of humoring an old man finding himself being put onto an iceberg floating away to the icy sea.  Did I say self-indulgently?  I meant megalomaniacally.

I am transferring. I saw nothing but encouragement from my professors. They supported me and seemed to be happy that I am moving to a place that will be better for me and my research interests. YMMV, of course, but I don't think I am too far off from the mean to be an outlier. It is a delicate situation that should be handled with care, no doubt. However, it is far from being uncommon.   

I am transferring. I saw nothing but encouragement from my professors. They supported me and seemed to be happy that I am moving to a place that will be better for me and my research interests. YMMV, of course, but I don't think I am too far off from the mean to be an outlier. It is a delicate situation that should be handled with care, no doubt. However, it is far from being uncommon.   

I am transferring. I saw nothing but encouragement from my professors. They supported me and seemed to be happy that I am moving to a place that will be better for me and my research interests. YMMV, of course, but I don't think I am too far off from the mean to be an outlier. It is a delicate situation that should be handled with care, no doubt. However, it is far from being uncommon.   

claim LSU acceptance.
They said, no assistanship is available for me, but they nominated me to Graduate School
Tuition Award. It covers all the tuition fees, but I do not know whether it provides monthy stipend or not. How do you think?

I think this should be memorized by every prospective student.
 
 
 
Thanks for the link! I went ahead and checked their data from ICPSR. I am sure it will be of interest to many people, since the graphs only contain so much information. Here is the link http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/34697 
 
 
I think in US people usually mean APSR, AJPS and JOP when they talk about top 3 in political science in general. I am certainly not the authority on this, and the journals you list are definitely great outlets, but I believe things get a bit more blurry after APSR, AJPS and IO for IR. ISQ is surely great, has high visibility, and I am sure many consider it to be among the previous group. I just think that the previous three is more uncontroversial. World Politics, it seems to me, became a more comparative politics-ish journal rather than an IR-ish journal in the recent past. Depending on their bent, many people may prefer Journal of Conflict Resolution over International Security. JOP, while considered one of the top 3 generalist journals in the discipline, lags behind IO for IR. Then there are other stuff like British Journal of Political Science, Quarterly Journal of Political Science, European Journal of International Relations etc. Anyway, I wasn't aiming to throw random comments on journals. My point is, in the US, for IR, much of it depends on the context when singling out individual journals for "top-ness" after APSR, AJPS and IO.