nina gorman

Yes, DuGuy, I AGREE wholeheartedly- at least from what I have gathered from browsing the Grad Cafe submit results, from conversations with other grad students. I imagine what really goes on behind the closed doors of the adcoms is practically impossible to research, and atherefore to assess. I would guess however, that the HIGHER UP you go in rank and research productivity of a university, the MORE SUBJECTIVE the process may become. Let's face it. The high tier schools want BOTH research assistants in the top 5 or 10% of their classes who have kicked butt on the GREs, AND they want them with THEIR research interests. I have also heard the theory that they want to get students at a middle range level of qualification- high enough to keep up with the work but not so high that the profs can't "mold" them into the professionals they hope them to be (whatever that is). I hope this molding rumor is more stereotype than reality based. I also think it is impossible for adcoms to avoid bias towards applicants who share their theoretical and sometimes political views. Your subjective hypothesis supports that of the almighty crapshoot theory discussed earlier in this forum. I was just playing with you about the mantra- trying to joke around to ease the pain of this application process, A REAL TRIAL FOR THE OL EGO I have found, and I only applied to three schools (two dinged and one to go) It must be hell for those who applied to 10 or more.

Do you see any other options besides these two? No lower ranked schools to consider? No other academic alternatives ? No other job alternatives to a boring 9-5? What about a bit o travel or schooling , some political activism or research abroad to spice things up? Maybe, the strain of your hard work applying is giving you grey colored glasses a bit. When things are not going well with a social institution, a short story by that witty satirist, the late Charles Bukowski can sometimes cheer me up. (Your rebellion ag. the constrictions of the 9-5 remind me a bit of some of his thoughts on this matter) Hold on brotha. Keep your head to the sky. nina gurly flynn

Dear DuGuy, Your conception has a strong view of the adcoms as rather subjective. I think a certain amount of fantasy helps us get by. Maybe if you think you might be a tad bit telepathic, you might consider expanding these visualizations and channeling them to the adcoms, preferably with mantra that suits your aims and mood -e.g. OOOOOMMMMM, The universe is one-ADCOMS OMMMMMM, R- E- A-D, OMMMM- MY OMMMM - W-R -I -T-I-N-G S-A-M-P-L-E. Not a bad idea. Hang in there, Grasshopper, :shock: DuGuy. May the Tao be with you. nina gurley flynn

Thanks poster, Sundaymonday for the CUNy info. I checked an e-mail address I don't use much and tforgot I had given them -here I found one from a Jessica Landis at CUNY saying that I too am on the waitlist (e-mail came in on 2/25). Do you know anything about their waitlist? Thanks. nina

I meant by government, what if government was dishing out the white supremecist propaganda? But we're getting off that tangent. I'm sorry I ever used the ethnicity component in my original theory example. I take primary responsibility for this can of worms I am glad to see getting sealed up. :oops: Re: your theory: most ethereal yet technological. Mmmm. I think it precisely explains some of my own rejects and several of those in the submits data of the Grad cafe. We are a creative bunch indeed.

addendum to last entry- is hard not to go off track tho, when someone accuses you of being a racist and then subsequently you are misinterpreted as calling another a nazi. was trying to set the record straight. also, my original theory on how grad committees decide partly includes the idea of constraints for specialized fellowships which overlaps wtih the issue of treatment to compensate for past wrongs- another responder had detoured to free speech - re the white power group on campus. Best to keep it to the thread. 8)

Yes, you are right - you'll notice with my last couple entries am trying get it back on track.

I applied to U of Az - pol sci got rejected - they took only 8 out of 70 this year and if they do what they did last year half their slots are for specialized demographic based fellowships. :cry: Got shot down by U of Md to study comparative politics within their soc. program and just found out am waitlisted for CUNY poli sci - they didn't even want a writing sample. I'd like to find out more about middle tier programs like these. (I don't know how to post that list that everyone puts up on where applied to and dispositions). :?: nina

Anyone know which page of this thread is listed the post on the ranked list of PhD programs in poli sci (don't want to browse the whole 48 pages) or where on web is listed. U.S. news rank info must get via subscription- no?

Anyone got word from CUNY poli sci? - my last shot, my last one of three tried. Dumped in this crapshoot by U of AZ poli sci and U of Md soc. Stats: 3.84 John Jay psych degree, 3.6 temple for soc, about 20 credits undergrad poli sci and 9 credits grad. GRE: Q- 560 (38%), V- 600 84%, A/W 6.0 / (think my math screwed me, along with the ivy and published competition?),but I have more than 20 years of teaching experience as psych/soc teacher, including 4 yrs f.t. at HBCU, a few years research exp., several presentations but no publications. CUNY takes about one of three but I wonder if I have a shot or if anyone knows how intense the competition is for this program?

Ticklemepink, You have tickled me enormously with your criminal justice system analagy. Have really turned the hallowed prize of PhD program access on its head. Re: tweaking- maybye the death penalty would be better switched to the top slot in your list as an indicator of having "Done Gradeeated" from a PhD program (albeit post full funding and full butt busting for 5-10 years).

I apologize to any and all who advocate the free speech of Nazis - I didn't mean to call anyone in this cat. a Nazi. I misread her e-mail as opening with an introduction of herself as a Nazi, as I mentioned. O.K? So you don't consider groups that advocate enslavement and extermination of a particular group as crossing the line from exercising free speech rights to that of engaging in hate crimes, as is the stance of the ACLU. States in the U.S. vary in their laws on this, and the battle continues. Would you make an exception to your stand for governments that would engage is such propaganda? Or are there any other exceptions you would make?

I dig the theories coming in on how admit committees decide. The hat and especially the staircase analagy are quite amusing. Hope they keep coming. No offense to adcoms who I assume are primarily hardworking profs taking time from their research to meet, plow through our often lengthy and esoteric writing samples, etc. It would be nice if they made known what system they did use. A member of Temple's soc adcom told me they use a point system. Kudos to adcoms but We need to do something to cope with the waiting and let out some steam to deal with the intense competition and rejects. Any other theories?

Yes, you are right - I mistakenly thought when I first read it that she was claiming herself as a neo Nazi. The courts have been battling the debates in drawing the line between free speech and hate crimes for years. My question still stands, what what do you think of a group who advocates the enslavement and/or killing of another group? Where is the line?

Got rejected by U of Arizona pol sci. Only took 8 out of 70 this year, but yet on website say they took 10 of 12. Turnaround between deadline of 2/1 and decisions by 2/12 was swift. Too often in ap process right hand didn't know what left was doing sometimes in grad office and dept. administratively, (but I screwed up too by mailing transcripts to grad office instead of dept0 GREs and a transcript misplaced by grad office. I got replacements in by the skin of my teeth for consideration I was told.