SuddenlyParanoid

I think some of the reason that some schools with very good placement are not ranked as high in US News is that they are more focused programs. Rochester is one of the three main boutiques (along with CalTech and Stanford GSB). All Rochester students take formal and methods work, if I'm not mistaken, and tend to place very well. However, when faculty judge the reputation of a program they probably look at its strengths in all the subfields even if the school doesn't place much emphasis on them.

Similarly, I assume Chicage's cohorts has a lot more theorists than the average. Since Chicago is awesome at that, their students do well but the raters take into account Chicago's strength across everything without "weighting" the subfields by emphasis.

As for me, I looked at the Chingos study, schools' placement that they place online (although many are incomplete, and US News rank.

For outside of academia, say consulting, the government, or think tanks, does the brand name of the school matter? So a lower ranked Ivy would look better than higher ranked publics or less well known privates? I would guess that it does plus the name brand adds status at cocktail parties and high school reunions where people aren't up on poli sci.

Thanks everyone.

Fuzzy that is a great model!

I've made some preliminary cuts of programs and need to know how to word my emails to them. For the form letters it's easy to respond to, but how do I write back to individual professors who have contacted me and say I'm not picking their school?

I want to let them know as soon as possible but I don't want to hurt their feelings or burn bridges for the future?

How are people checking their Yale status? Mine still just says application submitted on the ApplyYourself page.

Also, and I'm sure you didn't mean any harm by this, but we should probably refrain from saying that some schools are "not that great" as it is bound to hurt those who did get in, those who are planning to go there - not to mention that it is false, at least in the subfield I know about (theory). Those kind of assesments just open the door to uglier discussions than those we've been able to maintain.

Well, just to throw another example into this, I'll be studying GLBT issues in psychology, so being in a department that has similar political views on gay/lesbian issues is essential to me. This is another area where personal feelings and religious views often influence academic work. Not to mention that, as a queer person, I wouldn't feel safe in an environment that didn't have an open mind towards the GLBT community. I don't think this is about avoiding challenge and simply having my views "approved and reinforced," rather I agree with those who are simply looking for an environment that will allow their voice to be heard, and not suppressed.

bullseye , I wish I could have written that !

Not to be contentious, but there's a difference between tolerating and being happy. I'd rather be happy; life's too short. YMMV, obviously.

I am sure the Princeton notifications are fake. Maybe we should just stop reacting to the results page. Taking it as seriously as we have done will only lead to more and more bluffs. There is obviously someone who gets pleasure out of our terror. I think we shouldn't do him/her/them the favour.

See this is going downhill again, what with the intellectualism and the worry and the comp-studying. If you're not hung over this morning, you just aren't getting it.

Note that at certain levels of drunkenness one speaks in tongues, which (apparently) would help all you would-be comparativists. Based on who I've met in the business, it also makes for excellent close reading in the Straussian tradition.

Hey...just while we wait, I thought it would make sense to post the subfield rankings that US News did for the four traditional fields plus methodology.:

Methods

1Harvard University Cambridge, MA2Stanford University Stanford, CA3University of Michigan--Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MIUniversity of Rochester Rochester, NY5Princeton University Princeton, NJ6New York University New York, NY7Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO8University of California--San Diego La Jolla, CA9University of California--Berkeley Berkeley, CA10Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA11Ohio State University Columbus, OHYale University New Haven, CT13Columbia University New York, NYUniversity of California--Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA
American

1University of Michigan--Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI2Stanford University Stanford, CA3Harvard University Cambridge, MA4Princeton University Princeton, NJ5Yale University New Haven, CT6University of California--San Diego La Jolla, CA7University of California--Berkeley Berkeley, CA8Ohio State University Columbus, OH9Duke University Durham, NC10University of Wisconsin--Madison Madison, WI11University of North Carolina--Chapel Hill Chapel Hill , NC12Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MAUniversity of California--Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA14Columbia University New York, NY15University of Rochester Rochester, NYWashington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO17University of Chicago Chicago, ILUniversity of Minnesota--Twin Cities Minneapolis, MN19University of California--Davis Davis, CA20SUNY--Stony Brook Stony Brook, NY
Comparative

1Harvard University Cambridge, MA2Princeton University Princeton, NJ3University of California--Berkeley Berkeley, CA4Stanford University Stanford, CA5Yale University New Haven, CT6University of California--San Diego La Jolla, CA7University of Michigan--Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI8Columbia University New York, NY9University of California--Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA10Duke University Durham, NC11Cornell University Ithaca, NY12New York University New York, NYUniversity of North Carolina--Chapel Hill Chapel Hill , NC14Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MAUniversity of Chicago Chicago, IL16Northwestern University Evanston, IL17University of Wisconsin--Madison Madison, WI18University of Washington Seattle, WA
International

1Princeton University Princeton, NJStanford University Stanford, CA3Harvard University Cambridge, MA4Columbia University New York, NY5University of Michigan--Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI6University of California--San Diego La Jolla, CA7University of Chicago Chicago, IL8University of California--Berkeley Berkeley, CA9Yale University New Haven, CT10Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MANew York University New York, NY12Duke University Durham, NC13Cornell University Ithaca, NYUniversity of California--Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA15Ohio State University Columbus, OH16University of Minnesota--Twin Cities Minneapolis, MN17Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MDUniversity of Rochester Rochester, NYUniversity of Wisconsin--Madison Madison, WI20Georgetown University Washington, DC
Theory

1Harvard University Cambridge, MAUniversity of Chicago Chicago, IL3Princeton University Princeton, NJ4Yale University New Haven, CT5University of California--Berkeley Berkeley, CA6Duke University Durham, NC7Northwestern University Evanston, IL8Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD9Columbia University New York, NY10University of California--Los Angeles Los Angeles, CAUniversity of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN12University of Michigan--Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI13University of Minnesota--Twin Cities Minneapolis, MN14Stanford University Stanford, CAUniversity of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PAUniversity of Virginia Charlottesville, VA17Cornell University Ithaca, NY

Someone really has to grow up! Why the negative ratings?

Yes. My absolute favorite. I really hope they´re just playing with some of us until tomorrow...

Actually, SuddenlyParanoid, it´s a good sign you haven´t heard from them yet, because they are going to admit you for sure, and will certainly do so tomorrow...or am I dreaming?

Check the results search and simply type in "English", or better yet "English X Univeristy". That will tell you exactly when people heard last year. Some schools, particularly those with larger departments, may have acceptances in waves (but that should show up in the search results). Some schools are a little earlier this year, some schools a little later.

Perhaps they are applying because they have been taken in by insipid advice to pursue their whims (better known as "dreams") no matter how unrealistic or ill-suited, or they have actually convinced themselves that their love for "the game" is so deep and pure that it needs no merely external crutch like, say, income, job stability, personal dignity, or health insurance for their children--they can be happy without all these things so long as they can spend their days regressing Congressional voting data. Or because they have been strung along by the institutions themselves, which need TAs for their undergrads and RAs for their faculty just like top schools, and face no discernible disincentives to taking on far more graduate students than can ever find suitable employment on the academic job market.

It has never been clear to me whether anything but the immediate financial situation of the graduate institution and its ability to offer stipends places any constraint on graduate admission. And even that is not a great constraint--many people seem perfectly willing to dig themselves into debt at places like Georgetown for the blessed opportunity to be graduate students. What incentive do graduate programs have to peg their admissions to the academic job market and admit fewer students as fewer jobs open up?

Another thing that those perusing placement statistics should be aware of is that departments frequently include graduates in post-docs, and those working in some non-professorial capacity in higher education (for example, in administration or student services) among those placed at "academic jobs" without noting explicitly the nature of their employment. Further Googling may be prudent when dealing with these claims.

Thanks for your post. It's helpful to me even though I'm studying in another field.

Though I do have a question. You claim "I know that this sounds harsh, but for most jobs, a job file from a school out of the top 25 won't even be considered. It will just go on the trash. Let this sink in."

I decided to investigate this a little bit. You mention UGA in your original post (I'm assuming you're referring to UGA when you mention Athens). According to their Political Science Department website, no less than 12 professors earned their Ph.D. from a program that was NOT in the top-25 according the U.S. News and World Report. That's nearly 55% of the faculty. Further, UGA's undergrad program is ranked 58 overall and 20 for public schools by the U.S. News and World Report, so it is a fairly respectable, large research university.

How would you explain this?

I hope this doesn't sound confrontational - I'm genuinely curious.

Hi Scalia,

Welcome to Political Science! I found this forum really helpful for applying and hope you will too. Another great resource is the site, Political Science Job Rumors, which has a forum with advice for prospective grad students. It can be pretty catty and elitist, so be warned.

First, are you an econ major? If so, your coursework has definitely not been wasted. It will show that you can handle quantitative work. If you have taken or are going to take statistics or econometrics, that will help too. (I happen to know more about quant-heavy programs, hopefully someone else will fill in the qual side.) It would probably be easier if you could wait another year before applying so you could have an entire year heavy in poli sci, but you may not want that. Take any methods courses/game theory your school has.

Your grades are great which helps and means you won't be thrown out right away, but GPA alone doesn't get you into the top places. Study for the GRE. Since you didn't go to a top undergrad, the GRE will be a bit more important for you because adcomms won't take your near 4.0 as seriously. Aim for high 600's on the verbal, and breaking 700 is all really need anywhere. For the quant, you want as close to 800 as possible. If you get a 790 instead of an 800, you're already down to 92 percentile because of all the engineers taking the GRE. You don't need to get that high but it helps. REALLY try to at least pass 700.

Try to replace the visiting assistant professor with someone with tenure if possible. That may mean taking a fall class with few other students just so you can get to know someone and make them like you.

Do a senior thesis. It will give you research experience and you can use an excerpt of it as your writing sample and your thesis advisor can write you a really good letter. Try to be a research assistant instead of a teaching assistant this spring. Apply for research fellowships this summer as well.

You'll need a good statement of purpose. Make it clear that you know a phD is for a lifetime of research, that you enjoy research, and that you are not getting a phD because you love current events, watching Olbermann/Bill O'Reilly, and working on campaigns. SOPs help screen out people who seem clueless about grad school, don't be one of them.

Extracurriculars don't matter at all.

Apply to a bunch of schools. I applied to 13 and think it would be risky to apply to less than 8. Try to get a few reaches and a few safeties because grad admissions are hard to predict. Given your research interests, I would suggest any of the schools I applied to in my signature as well as MSU, Wisconsin, UIUC, UNC Chapel Hill. Keep rankings in mind because they DO affect placement but also pay attention to location, WEATHER, quality of life, fit.

It's hard to predict your chances but you definitely have a good chance and I think you should be able to hit a top 20 for sure and maybe as high as 1, depending on your writing sample and SOP.

Yes, I understand your stance on the issue and that a few people from non-top institutions still manage to get great jobs in academia. But, for most people, going to Emory will make job hunting inevitably difficult in academia. This is why I didn't even think about applying to non-top-notch schools, just like most of you here.
I am also often surprised by how so many people apply to non-HYPC Ivy-league poli sci programs, thinking that they are REALLY good, not to mention people always confuse politics with political science.

Affirmative action is not in place only to afford underprivileged individuals a leg up. It is so important to have people with whom a student can identify, to have people who represent the populace, in positions of power and authority. When students of a certain background see professors and grad students with whom they can identify, they will be more motivated to succeed. It's about finding mentors and role models. I know that I am not articulating this very well, but people always seem to think that affirmative action is designed to reward individuals for suffering. That is NOT the point. Let's look at the story of a hypothetical black girl, we will call her X. If X wants to be an academic, but does not see anyone who represents her, she may think that academia is not culturally appropriate for her; she may think that because of who she is and where she grew up that she is not good enough for academia, because no one like her has succeeded in pursuing it; she may work really hard but never crack the ceiling because she doesn't have anyone to mentor her the way all of the white students around her do; or, she may say "screw it" and work her ass off to succeed, and do it. If X were able, from the start of her journey, to have a role model--a black female academic with whom she could identify (even if that role model were from a financially privileged family)--she would be less likely to regard her background as a barrier and would be more likely to succeed from the start.

Now, this is only one hypothetical story. And, those of you who have always had role models who look and sound like you, who have always had mentors and people to look up to--you may not understand how important it is to have role models with whom you can identify. If you don't realize HOW lucky you are to have had these role models and mentors with whom you can identify (for whatever reason) you entire life--THAT is called privilege. You have the privilege of having people who represent you in visible positions of authority. You have the privilege not to realize what a difference this makes.

I realize that I probably did not articulate this well at all, that people will probably pick holes in what I say, and that I may enrage others. But I feel like the posters on this thread have largely missed the point. This isn't about institutionalized racism or Jim Crow or being denied a bank loan because of your ethnicity (as was the case with someone I know). The drive for diversity is as aspirational as it is anything else. And many of the people here need to wake up and smell the privilege. If you've never had to think about this because it doesn't directly impact your life: you are lucky, and privileged.

Edited to add: I am not trying to stomp on anyone's opinion here or suggest that s/he shouldn't be allowed to have one, whatever it is. Just trying to add some perspective. I hope I haven't implied here that I think one is not "entitled to have an opinion" for any reason.

And YES I believe in meritocracy. Isn't that what got the US far ahead? People get rewarded for their work. What a concept.

OK- so like most of you on this forum, I simply can't stand the waiting and am looking forward for this process to be over. So I did a little phone calling today to try and get the facts straight on things. The following schools should be sending notifications, according to my conversations, at the listed times:

UCSD- Most likely next week, week after at the latest
Rochester- Next week
MIT- End of this month, or early next month
UT-Austin- Despite some reports about decisions this week, the woman I spoke with (although it wasn't Megan Mulligan) said "one to two weeks"
Emory- Next week if you haven't heard this week (ie we'll make sure to send the formal rejection)
Notre Dame- Two weeks probably
UNC-CH- "The next couple weeks"
Iowa- Said because of budget cuts they weren't sure about whether they'd be able to fund students this year (I hope this doesn't set off a huge firestorm on the board), but probably three weeks when we do hear

Anyhow, that's what I gathered if it's useful to anybody

Go to Alcohol. Go directly to Alcohol. Do not pass Liquor Cabinet, do not collect 200$.

I have gotten 3 official rejections, 1 unofficial rejection, and I have gotten no interview invitations (kiss of death for neuroscience programs). It looks like I got rejected across the board.

How I am dealing with it: ice cream, work, some TV (I almost never watch TV), A LOT of hiking. Just keep on going. Do the things you like and have fun with. It hurts, but life goes on.

Good luck to you!

Seadub:

I do not want to start a flame war here. But here's the deal.

First, you forgot option c, I didn't work AT ALL in my freshman and sophomore years because I was an arrogant SOB who didn't give a rat's butt about my grades in classes other than those related to my major. No lie: I deliberately failed and had to repeat Freshman English 101 just because I thought the prof was a flaming idiot.

That didn't stop me from, later in life, from reconsidering, and working on English on my own time. I studied vocab, literature, poetry, rhetoric, philosophy, drama, etc. etc., and EVENTUALLY developed superior skills in English, if the GRE is any measure (and that is debatable). I scored 800 on the GRE-Verbal, for the record.

My point is that one's four undergraduate years in college do not inalterably and immutably determine one's fate. One's early grades do not set in stone tablets whether one is EVER eligible or qualified for advanced studies. I grant you, a 3.5 or better in all subjects the first time around is WISER. But not everybody is wise when they are 18 or 19 years old. Some of us were spoiled brats.

But the world is made of many kinds of people, and, if you didn't read it in my previous post: in my undergraduate first two years, though I was 18 yrs old, I had the maturity of about an 8-year-old. Should that disqualify me from EVER aspiring to advanced learning? I say NO. Should it force me to prove myself by taking a harder road? Of course it should!

Finally, I'd be a lot more concerned at how my physician did in Medical School, how well he/she is regarded by his/her peers, whether he/she is Board-Certified or not ... than I would about whether or not he/she spent most of his/her freshman and sophomore years screwing around because he/she thought partying was more important than studying.

A lot of minorities are admitted into undergrad with these "low stats" and have done well in their undergraduate career. Why is graduate study any different? If they have the right research experiences, a good GPA, good recs, and a good SOP, I don't think poor GRE scores = unsuccessful graduate student. Remember the GREs/SATs, etc are culturally biased and aren't good measures of success to begin with.