exposingfalsehoods

Like I said, I am not a sociology applicant, but here's some advice: If you have received six offers of admission and you have narrowed your interest to just two of those offers, then you should do every sociology applicant a courtesy and turn down those other four offers (if you have not done so already).

Political Science likely will be heavily quantitative. If political theory is more your thing, then do political philosophy and practical ethics--you still keep up on political science trends, you still are engaged with practical affairs, and you will be trained better than a political scientist in evaluation and formulation of arguments.

I have yet to hear back from my philosophy applications, but I would say that rank of program should be valued more than fit only if the program in which one fits well is not itself respectably ranked. If this condition is not met, then one should go with fit.

I did not apply to any sociology programs, so my posting here is not a matter of sour grapes. I have a few thoughts about this post: First, I think this post is untimely. We are not even half way through February, which means not only that many have yet to hear back from any schools, but also that it is rather neurotic to be stressed over a decision that need not to be made until April. Second, I think this post is insensitive. The OP has enjoyed much success this admissions cycle but is no doubt aware that some have received only rejections and some have not heard anything at all. It shows little to no thoughtfulness and sensitivity toward these others (which is unfortunate given that we are talking about "sociology," a discipline expressly focused on social realities) who are hoping just to get into one program period, much less to two top-5 programs. Third, I think this post is pompous. If the OP is as "torn" and "stressed" as he/she makes out, why is he/she taking up considerable time and space indulging in self-congratulatory, self-referential posts here at this juncture of the admissions cycle but is waiting until "the next couple of weeks" to ask such pressing questions that would be most suitably answered by the current students and faculty at the two programs in question? Perhaps the questions he/she asks are legitimate and without guile; but asking them here and now strikes me as bombast.

According to the Notre Dame Spring Calendar, the CJA area faculty met today from 4:30pm-6:30pm. At about 5:00pm I passed the room where this meeting was held and looked in the window... There were roughly four or five faculty around a large table. There was a large box on the table out of which were protruding several files. It appeared that the faculty were passing around a bottle of wine while they were talking. I believe this was the CJA area admissions meeting, and, if so, then it seems decisions were made over red wine.

What he/she said implied that this is the case across at least some of the areas of concentration. Nothing was said about any area having completed its notifications for the interview weekend. I advise you to maintain some degree of hope until you either get a call (in which case you need no longer hope) or do not receive a call by Sunday night.

Someone inside the Notre Dame theology department told me that phone calls for inviting applicants to the interview weekend will continue through this weekend. Also, he/she told me that if you do not hear from ND by Sunday then you are out.

Congratulations! Now you have to turn down your UNC offer quickly just in case they are still making decisions. Given your early admit calls and that you are the only one posting on Cal and UNC, are you being offered special fellowships?

Having been involved in admissions, I can attest that some people here are blowing a lot of smoke. GRE's are typically the least important component of an application. GRE's are typically used for two purposes in admissions: 1) university-wide fellowship competition; 2) department admissions' minimum cut-off. Typically, anywhere from 1150-1200 on Q and V stands as an absolute minimum cut-off point for some, though not all, schools. Superb GRE scores (i.e., 1450+) can give you a boost, but they will never get you in in their own right. GRE scores are not used as the main basis for comparison of applicants. In fact, statement of purpose, letters of recommendation, and writing sample (where applicable) are the most important components of the applications and serve as the most reliable basis for comparison (someone could get very lucky on the GRE but evince no real talent for sociological study). The confusion seems to be over the difference between average GRE scores of admitted and/or enrolled applicants and minimum required GRE scores. There is often, though not always, a correlation between successful applicants and applicants with high GRE scores, but this is certainly not a casual relation (as we all have learned in Sociology 101, correlations and causal relations are not coextensive). Finally, let's look at UNC's published admissions stats in sociology (a top-5 program): In 2009, the average GRE scores for ACCEPTED applicants were: 526.67 V, 633.33 Q. These are both well below the 90th percentile in their respective area. The average scores for DENIED applicants were: 587.14 V, 610.00 Q. Source: http://gradschool.unc.edu/pdf/2009-ADMISSION-STATISTICS.pdf As you can see, UNC's denied applicants had a higher average GRE score in V than the applicants it accepted, and the Q scores were comparable. This is just one example (though there are many more), but it is enough to show that there is quite a bit of confusion in this thread on how graduate admissions work.