victorydance

I ended up accepting UT Austin.

I just basically read my sub-topic(s) on my own. The rest of the important literature will come to me through seminars, which in my discipline are extremely heavy reading. I think you need to be strategic, there is a shitload of literature in any discipline that really has no relevance or value to a lot of people in that field.

Well if you didn't get into the development stream, then it's pretty much a straight-forward political science program (one elective I think). I mean, you can write your thesis on an interdisciplinary topic, but the coursework is almost all poli sci. If you haven't looked at this yet, you should: https://www.mcgill.ca/politicalscience/files/politicalscience/2014-2015_ma_program_guide_3.pdf No one really works on solely democratization really in the faculty, democratization is kind of an older topic in political science. If you are interested in Asia, there is Prof. Kuhonta (SE Asia - political economy and political parties/systems), Subramanian (South Asia, India - identity politics), and Prof. Wang (China - local politics and contentious politics). Prof. Oxhorn is the head of ISID at McGill and he more broadly works on political economy and civil society, but with a focus on Latin America. As far as developmental economics, you have Grimard (labour and consumption), Laszlo (labour, development economics), and Chemin (institutional economics); but I'm not sure how much access you would have to these people.

Yeah, but what do you study? "Development" is a very broad term. From what I know, the only difference between the MA in political science and the development studies stream is one seminar.

What do you study exactly? I know the faculty of McGill very well.

Yeah, they seemed to have wanted people to respond in two weeks (by the 27th)...which is ridiculous, I didn't even reply to their acceptance email. I mean jeez, they barely fund any of their students then they expect them to commit before SSHRC results come out?

The irony here is you are the one being selfish. People who have been accepted don't owe you anything. I, personally, am having a hard time deciding on my program. One thing is for sure, I couldn't care less about the people on the waiting list.

I find a lot of the problems (like many socio-cultural differences) stem from ignorance. Most natural science people don't have really any iota of substantive knowledge about social sciences and therefore base a lot of their opinions on things they have no clue about, and vice versa for social science people. I think the inferiority complex is pretty real in the social sciences. On the other hand, I love when natural science people think they are far superior to social scientists; it would be a blast to see one of them come into graduate seminars in social sciences and see them hack it - they won't. Anyone who doesn't see the value of both social sciences and natural sciences is not worth my time. Anyone who actually believes that disciplines like economics, political science, geography, and sociology are not vitally important to understanding the world around us has their head up their ass. Yes, the disciplines have constraints because of the variable of human behaviour. And yes, social scientists try to use the scientific method but it's not even close to being able undercover truths and make conclusions as the natural sciences are. But at the end of the day every discipline is trying to do the same thing: answer questions about things and create new knowledge. For me personally, I was insanely interested in chemistry when I was younger. But I realized fairly early that chemistry research isn't going to get me to get up in the morning the way that political science does. I don't want to spend much of my time in a lab and researching very narrow questions. I enjoy to get out in the world and contemplate big theories that affect civilization on a day-to-day basis. I have a deep respect for anyone who does good research in any discipline, I couldn't really care less about petty debates on who has the most scientific chops.

I think it's a fairly straightforward decision if you know whether you want a more academic or practical program.

It's not a warning sign because many STEM disciplines don't actively publish their placement records, whether the placements/program are good or not.

For me, I don't really care about "traditional wants and desires." I don't care about material things like owning a home or even cars, starting a family, getting married, or building a career. I live on 15K a year (albeit abroad, not in North America) already in a very minimalist lifestyle. Considering the above, I think it made the choice to pursue graduate education in poli sci a lot easier. I know for a fact that the academic market is shit, but a lot of people look at through the lens of a more traditional outlook where people regret making the decision to pursue a Ph.D. because of opportunity cost or lack of job security, ect. These things aren't really important to me so it makes it easier for me to accept the realities of the tough road ahead. I haven't fully committed to this path yet and I still wonder whether it is the right choice for me, but then I consider the alternative and realize why the hell wouldn't I want to continue doing research and learning about things I am deeply interested in? What's the alternative? To get a mediocre job somewhere and live a little more comfortably? Meh, it's not really much different than if I choose to go down this academic path.

But these situations aren't really the same. The OP has an undergraduate degree in political science. The person you are talking about decided to switch disciplines going into a Ph.D. program, it wouldn't be expected at all for him or her to have an SOP from a political science prof. Furthermore, during the OP's senior year he failed an entire semester. I am thinking that not having a political science prof be a LOR to help him explain that or at least show that he is capable of succeeding in a political science program or environment is a mistake. Maybe I am wrong? I don't know but I think it is a risk personally. Especially from someone who hasn't succeeded in two cycles already. There is something in his application that is signalling to admission committees that he isn't a good fit for a Ph.D. in political science...moving further away from that is probably not the way to go IMO. There is more background here: This isn't a question of "economics vs. political science LORs" I am more referring to his personal situation.

I can almost guarantee that you will not have a successful cycle with three economists as your LOR writers.

UBC acceptances are out.

POIs have relatively no influence on the decision, unless they are on the admission committee but even then it doesn't necessarily influence anything. You state who you are interested in working with based on your research and the admission committee will decide whether you fit in the program. Having a LOR from someone who did their Ph.D. at the university you are applying to may help, but they are going to look at your whole profile vs. the other applicants' whole profiles to decide if you get in or not. I think you are over-thinking this. The SOP is an exercise to show that you have a general idea what political science is about, how research works, and to show that you can fit interests with faculty in the university. That's it.

Negligible impact either positively or negatively. If your work experience can be tied directly to your research interests it may provide a bit of a bonus but other than that it's not worth anything really.

1) There is only a few days the temp drops below 0 degrees in Vancouver during the winter. 2) Perhaps once a year there is a day or two of real snowfall, but the snow rarely lasts long. Very rarely does snow stay for a long period of time in Vancouver. 3) No. The problem with biking during the winter is not the temperature, it's the rain. From October to February there is a lot of rain. Like sometimes you will have rainfall for 20 days straight kind of rain and sometimes it will literally pour for a week on end.

One W on your transcript has no effect on anything. There could be dozens of reasons for that W and no one would care.

Everything is expensive in Vancouver, everything. Luckily, SFU is located in the suburbs, so there are some options for cheaper rent. Look at places like New Westminster and Coquitlam as well which can be a bit more affordable. If you are near the skytrain, it wouldn't be that much of a longer commute than Burnaby depending of course on where in Burnaby (it's quite a large municipality). I would highly recommend living off the hill, I have never studied at SFU but I heard it's pretty depressing if you are always up there. Food prices are ridiculous, especially produce and dairy. However, not sure how much different than Alaska it is due to its remoteness so it might not be that much different than what you are used to. Communications services are often quite expensive in Canada due to the private sector's lack of competition, so cell phone bills and internet can be pricey. Bring an unlocked phone and get a monthly contract. Gas is ridiculous. Even with the reduction since the price of oil went down you are looking at about $1.20 a litre, which is approx. $4.50 for a gallon in reference. Insurance can be pricey as well. Honestly, I would highly recommend not having a car in Vancouver. The public transportation is good enough to forego it and it will save you a lot of money. Utilities, such as heating and electricity really aren't that bad; BC has a pretty solid energy sector.

This might not be the best sub-forum for this question.

10K a year does not go far in Vancouver though, keep that in mind.

When I was there not too long ago Hyde Park seemed kind of shit in my opinion. I don't understand why anyone would pay premium rent to live in a residential neighbourhood. I mean, yeah it's close to campus and nice enough (but nothing special either), but there are relatively no restaurants, grocery stores, or any other type of amenities at all. No idea what the hype is about. I am more looking at the Hancock and East Side region, where you can get way lower rent and actually are in much better proximity to more services and amenities.

Relax. You are accepted. The official letter/email will come soon.

Top program.

I would never date someone I wasn't attracted to, even someone I was mildly attracted to.