NYCBluenose
-
Posts
89 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NYCBluenose
-
-
I'm even stupider than "anyone", and got a q-score of 158 (I think it was in the mid 70s as a percentile), and am going to a top-20. You might well need 90th percentile across the board to get into a top-10, but in the event you are more of a qualitative person, don't be discouraged!
You don't need to be crazily strong in math to get into a good program. I nearly failed pre-calc in high school and did as little math as I possibly could in college. You do still need to show strengths in other areas to compensate though (research experience, knowledgeable SOP etc.)
-
hey esotericish, do you have any suggestions for apartment complexes in Carrboro? Ideally, I'd love something that wasn't too far out west so I could walk home from campus if needed.
-
PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Fairly prestigious private university in the northeast
Major(s)/Minor(s): International Relations
Undergrad GPA: 3.57
Type of Grad: M.A in European Studies from well-known European university
Grad GPA: 4.0
GRE: V: 167 Q: 158 AW:5.5
Any Special Courses:
Letters of Recommendation: 1 from Undergrad Advisor/Mentor (Tenured Prof in Comp. Pol), 1 from M.A Advisor (Tenured Prof. in Political Economy), 1 from Professor in M.A (Assistant Prof in Sociology)
Research Experience: Three stints as R.A (two in undergrad, one during M.A), research experience at NGO internship, B.A and M.A Theses
Teaching Experience: None
Subfield/Research Interests: party politics, political economy, constructivism
Other:
RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Johns Hopkins ($$), UNC Chapel Hill ($$), Sciences Po Paris
Waitlists: George Washington, Georgetown, NYU Sociology
Rejections: Berkeley, Columbia, Michigan, Yale, UCSD, Northwestern, MIT, Duke
Pending: LSE
Going to: UNC Chapel HillLESSONS LEARNED:
This was my second cycle. In retrospect, my first cycle I had absolutely no idea what I was doing, and deservedly struck out. You may not be as naive as I was, but I hope others can avoid my mistakes. (As a caveat, all this is just my two cents, and my experience may well not be representative of the norm).
1) Do what you have to do to get decent GRE scores: the cutoffs aren't absolute, but scores below a certain level kill your credibility. My first cycle my quant score was 152, and I doubt my applications even got a second look. This cycle, I spent a few months studying quant; my final scores still weren't good enough for the top-10, but were close enough to get into some good programs.2) Fit matters enormously. Over my two cycles I've been rejected by some low-ranked programs and accepted by some fairly strong ones. Don't bother applying to programs just because they're strong/prestigious (like I did); you need to be able to make a credible case that you'd fit with several faculty members. The places I was accepted had either a few professors with a very close fit in my particular sub-field niche, or 5 or 6 professors with broader connections to my regional and/or substantive interests.
3) To determine fit and strengthen your SOP, I'd suggest going through faculty pages intensively. When you find a professor whose interests seem aligned with yours, check out their CV and read one or two of their articles. This will help you express a clear fit with the program, and committees notice that.4) This is an exhausting and stressful process. I'd strongly suggest that after submitting your apps, you avoid grad cafe like the plague until the end of January at least. If it doesn't work out in the first cycle, don't give up! The competition is ferocious and the results can be a bit arbitrary. If academia/research is all you can imagine doing (and you shouldn't apply for PhDs otherwise), then take the time to improve your app materials and give it another go. Many people on this board have struck out on their first cycle, only to get into fantastic programs the second time around.
SOP: The best SOPs that I've seen have catchy hooks at the beginning. I wasn't creative enough for that. I found a compromise which was to explain the puzzle of a research question/agenda that I'm interested in, briefly mention some of the literature, and describe a different approach I was interested in taking. This might be too specific for some, but I had some modest success with this. In the body I briefly discussed my previous academic and professional experience, but mostly how they prepared me to pursue my research interests going forward. Somewhere (I did it in the final paragraph) you should make a sustained case that you're a good fit with the department; I cited specific professors and some of their previous work that was relevant to my interests.- Dwar, law2phd and AuldReekie
-
3
-
Out of positive votes. Congrats everybody! Very glad to hear so much good news after a brutally long cycle!
- Username 2 and glad10
-
1
-
1
-
Hi all,
Does anyone know exactly what time the deadline to accept offers is on April 15th?
I'm accepted at program X, but have been waitlisted at program Y. Program Y has told me that their decision might well come at around noon or 1 on April 15th. Is this technically after the deadline? I'm worried that, worst case scenario, I could wait until the afternoon of April 15th, only to be rejected by program Y and have my offer at program X rescinded for having missed the deadline.
Many thanks for your help!
-
Hi guys, I tried to find this info on their website and using the search function, but I'm a bit confused. I know the deadline to accept offers is April 15th, but what time does that mean exactly. Midnight on the 14th? Noon on the 15th? The night of April 15th?
I have a good offer from program X, but am waitlisted at program Y and have been told that their decision could well come around noon on the 15th. Would waiting this long jeopardize my offer at program X? My fear is that I could wait for program Y, not be accepted off the waitlist, but have my offer at X rescinded because I missed the deadline.
Thanks for your help! -
That wasn't me, but I just got a rejection from Duke as well. It was an email to check the website (self-service account).
-
Hi all! I wanted you ask you guys for some advice about whether my interests could fit within sociology. Just a quick recap of my situation, I've got an MA in Poli Sci and have applied for PhDs almost entirely in Poli Sci, where I have a few acceptances. But I have one waitlist at a top-20 sociology program, and need to decide whether it would make sense to pursue in case I get in off the waitlist at the last minute.
I'm interested in the interplay between economic crises and ideas about economic policy, and more specifically in trying to explain the political resilience of neoliberalism following the Great Recession. The subfield I'm interested in (social constructivism) is sort of a marginal/heterodox one within political science, and as the field moves in an ever more quantitative direction, I've thought about making the switch to sociology. That said, I'm a bit worried that my relative ignorance of sociology literature would set me back.
So I guess I have two questions: 1) do you think these interests would fit and could be pursued within sociology? and 2) what is the place of political sociology/political economy within the field? I've heard that there are fairly few jobs open for this subfield, so do you think it is worth specializing in it?
Sorry if that was a bit long, but any thoughts/advice would be appreciated. Thanks!!! -
At least we're avoiding rampant racism/sexism
- gr22 and smallworld
-
2
-
OP, I went 0/8 for PhDs last year (pretty much, one offer unfunded). This year I applied even more widely and have a top 20 acceptance, a top 40, and a few waitlists. I think it's worth a second cycle if you really see academia as the place for you. But I agree that you should look for a job/internship for this year, and try and get that M.A paid for in the framework of a PhD program. As an alternative, I did an MA abroad, which can be way way cheaper than in the States.
The biggest difference for me from cycle to cycle was re-working my SOP and focusing obsessively on fit. It's really worth reading at least 3 or 4 articles from each of the professors you propose to work with so you can better connect your interests to theirs in your application.
-
Is it entirely different, cooperstreet? It's not exactly a wild flight of fancy. People who claim causal inference as the core mission of political science, and assert that only quantitative research can lead to causal inference delegitimize alternate approaches, sometimes implicitly, and sometimes explicitly.
- AuldReekie and Pol
-
2
-
That was never the case at the well-known Continental European university where I did my MA, and it didn't seem like it was at the UK schools I applied to either. But to the extent that quantitative people are deliberately marginalized in Canada or elsewhere, that's just as stupid. Pluralism makes the discipline stronger, not exclusionary groupthink (be it quantitative or qualitative).
Just one example. Constructivism makes rational choice stronger, by forcing it to address the weaknesses of some of its core assumptions (subjectivity of interests, importance of non-material interests). Similarly, rational choice makes constructivism stronger, by forcing it to specify and operationalize 'ideas' as an analytical concept, and consider the links between ideas and material interests.
-
I don't like the way the OP has overreacted in this thread, and I certainly don't approve of some of his comments. That said, I generally think that most people on this thread need to understand the context in which qualitatively-oriented people are operating. And that is being told that our approach has no place in the discipline. This is something that the quantitatively-inclined will never hear in their careers.
Quantitative methods can absolutely be useful for a huge variety of questions, and have a valuable place in political science. I would never dispute that. But when you hear comments to the effect that even a mixed-methods dissertation 'sends off the wrong signals', and that qualitative dissertations belong in sociology or the humanities, we've gone way too far in the direction of conformist groupthink. How can we read the work of giants like Peter Hall, Paul Pierson, Theda Skocpol, and Alexander Wendt (to name only a few) and then casually say that qualitative work is not political science?
So try to view people's frustrations in context: they feel like they're being pushed out.- qeta, ARealDowner and AuldReekie
-
3
-
I have had people tell me that, and it's difficult to weigh the benefits and downsides. Because if I can't find any place here in the US that is willing to fund me, then should I just give up and not bother? Because that seems to be where most of the people I've spoken with have leaned. The thing is, there are lots of people that I find very interesting who are turning out what is to me very interesting work, but they basically are all in Europe. Buzan, Waever, Linklater, Winn, and more. When all is said and done, if I decide to go to Grad-School it is an investment in myself and I don't have a problem with paying for it, I'd rather not have to, but I'd also rather pay than simply be rewarded for toeing some party line that I don't ultimately agree with. I figure I'll have to do plenty of that in the "real world", I shouldn't have to compromise on my education too.
NYCBluenose: This is very helpful and thoughtful, and I suppose hits at one of the problems that I'm having. I struggle to differentiate between CP and IR, to me it's just too interconnected, and I am also looking at at least doing an MA in Europe, and most of my advisers are more than happy to encourage me to do that, they just then want me to come home, buckle down, and get serious with lots and lots of Quant classes ( I suppose now is as good a time as any to mention the reason my GPA is a 3.74 but my majors are 4.0's is because I failed a math class, so taking more is likely to result in similar grades and is the reason I haven't taken the GRE yet) I really appreciate your perspective on this and all I can do is offer you encouragement and moral support. It's seemingly much more difficult of a road than I anticipated..
At the end of the day, you are not going to be happy doing someone else's research, so don't bother doing a PhD somewhere that won't take a qual/comparative historical perspective seriously (like Rochester or NYU). That said, doing one or two quant classes won't kill you, and will at the very minimum help you to understand a huge, important body of poli sci literature. You'll need to understand that approach on its own terms in able to critique it.
-
To the OP: I'm in the same boat (although a bit further along in the application process). My research perspective is also constructivist, although my interests are in comparative political economy, rather than IR theory, so I'm not sure how much my specific advice re: programs will help you.
My impression is that constructivists have established a foothold in American political science, but still a marginal one. You're going to be swimming against the current, and you probably won't love your required methods sequence. That said, there are constructivist scholars working at the very highest level. Again, w/ the caveat that I'm relatively ignorant of IR, I'd direct you towards Harvard (especially since I heard Sikkink is moving there), Berkeley, Northwestern (general reputation for heterodoxy and supposed to be great in IR theory), and I guess Ohio State (Wendt), and further down the chain George Washington (Finnemore/Farrell), Georgetown (McNamara), and Johns Hopkins.
Personally, my approach was to look at departments with constructivists or methodological pluralists, but to present my research interests in a way that wasn't too glaringly heterodox. In many of my apps, I emphasized the overlaps of my regional and substantive interests with faculty members more than my methodological/epistemological focus. My results with this approach have been mixed (one top 20 acceptance, one top 50 acceptance), but your stats look better than mine. I also did an MA in Europe, which was a great experience (people don't take you any less seriously as a qual), but decided not to focus my PhD apps there because of concerns about the UK/EU job market.
Anyway, best of luck and keep fighting the good fight! Feel free to PM me with any questions
- tpop, slacktivist, angellily0330 and 1 other
-
4
-
Did anyone here get accepted at NYU? Do you know if you're going to accept your offer or not? Many thanks from a nervous waitlist-ee
-
I'm curious if anyone else could weigh in on living in Chapel Hill vs. Carrboro. As a sheltered and impractical New Yorker, I'm also wondering if it's at all possible to live around UNC without a car
-
Wow, crazy timing. I just got waitlisted from NYU (an email from the DGS). They say they had 400 applicants and are aiming for a cohort of 10. Eek.
-
Thanks for the info hgp!! While that's a bit strange/contradictory, seems like we can at least hope that not all admits are already out
-
Hi guys! I'm mostly applying to political science programs, but did apply to NYU for political sociology.
I know that a few NYU acceptances were posted a few days ago, but are those of you that applied still expecting some news? Or do we think all the acceptances/waitlists are already out? Thanks, and best of luck to everyone this cycle!
-
Haha I got that too! Although I think if you look at the 'messaging' tab, its because they wanted to encourage us to apply for their (probably high-tuition) M.A program. Thanks, but having already paid through the nose for one M.A, I think I've had enough!
Btw, congrats on the UCLA and Washington admits guys! -
Thanks guys! -Estotericish, my subfield is comparative politics (focus on Europe)
-
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
- TheGnome, kwaddy, letsgo2015 and 6 others
-
9
-
Rejected at UCSD as well. Ugh.
Question about quant pre-reqs
in Political Science Forum
Posted
Annae, one thing you should keep in mind is that many programs have very defined quantitative profiles, and others are more allowing of qualitative work. So if you do want to go in a more qualitative direction, i'd suggest avoiding Stanford, Princeton, NYU, and Rochester in particular (maybe Michigan as well).
Programs which are more accepting of qualitative stuff (from faculty and reputation): Harvard, Berkeley, Northwestern, Washington University in St. Louis, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins.
Good luck!