letstalkshop

Even so, I would urge caution. I have seen several well qualified friends apply to PhD programs and underestimate how brutal the competition is. 
Anyway. I have a similar background to yourself. I have a BA in Economics and will be finishing a terminal MA degree in the field this year. I intend to try to make the switch over to sociology for my PhD though. I too am concerned whether my academic background will be a hindrance. What I'm heavily relying on is the writing sample. I figure that the writing sample is the best shot I have to prove that I both that I have read the sociology literature and that my economics training is applicable across disciplines. 
I'm applying mainly to the UCs myself.  

This might come off as pessimistic, but I would hesitate to consider any department a "safety" school...especially in the top 20. I understand that you feel like you have a strong application and are feeling confident which is great since the application cycle can be incredibly stressful. That being said there are a lot of things outside of your control that go into application evaluations. I can assure you that nobody is going to worry about a misplaced application, especially considering you will need letters of recommendation as a part of your package.
 

Hello Ali, unless you want to provide more context for your question, this sound like a request for help with a homework assignment, which is not the purpose of this board. If that is not what this question is about, I suggest you tell us more about how the question came up and what you have done to try and answer it.

It's difficult to say whether they'd give you a pass, but it certainly sounds like you won't do badly on the quant GRE anyway. It's basically the same math as the SAT. You just have to make sure you remember all that old stuff. You'll be fine. 

Stop fretting about the GRE and go take it. If you do badly the first time you don't have to send your scores, and it will demystify the test for you and help you figure out what to prepare for. And yes, your application might be better off if you were from a more highly ranked institution, but this is probably not a disqualifier, provided that you have good research experience. I had just under a 3.6 in undergrad and got into good programs. It's really hard to say whether or not you'll get into Emory without knowing more about your research experience and without knowing your GRE scores, but I think your undergrad professors would probably just tell you if they thought applying was a waste of your time. 

Accepted NYU's offer today.

The submission form on the results board asks for your undergraduate GPA. If you want to share your MA GPA, you can write it in in the "Notes" section. Whether or not MA classes are closer to the type of work you'd be doing for your PhD, for the most part high grad school grades are not a reflection of your ability to do grad-level work well. The departments that I have experience with acknowledge this. 

Can I respectfully request that people stop using their MA GPA on the results board? Everybody knows that grad school grades aren't real. I'd much rather know your GPA from undergrad. Don't really care that you have a 3.9999 MA GPA. 

Can I respectfully request that people stop using their MA GPA on the results board? Everybody knows that grad school grades aren't real. I'd much rather know your GPA from undergrad. Don't really care that you have a 3.9999 MA GPA. 

Sure, he's under a microscope as a sociologist who has mainstream fame. But the Sudhir hating gets old pretty fast. Especially at Columbia. I don't even have a stake in defending him...I just think it's tired.

Yes it is I took a "Which Broad City Character Are You?" quiz and I got her! I thought it was hilarious, love that show.
 
Thank you!

rlb your photo. Is that the "post office" clerk from Broad City? I love it. And congrats.

Unless all of the applicants are equally strong, whether or not some applicants got accepted without going to the event is irrelevant. 

Also, from the data you've given, they invited their top candidates. That means they're considering, strongly considering, all of you. 
 
Of the people at the weekend, it seems like you just didn't make the cut?
 
You've been wait listed, so you're still a top candidate, you just weren't one of the ones that got offered acceptance.

Wow, I've seen a lot of vain, petty posts on this site, but this one's in the running for the most amazing.
 
Come on, dude/dudette. Do you honestly think they're running some sort of giant prank on you? A $300 prank, nonetheless? Until you've got an acceptance letter in your hand, nothing is guaranteed, so something obviously made them decide that you weren't right for the program. Maybe your interviewer said an acceptance was a "given" (though I seriously doubt that, as most people in that position would be way more professional about the situation), but that's not a guarantee. 
 
Recruitment events are recruitment events. That's all they are. 

No. During my exit interview, my interviewer told me that my acceptance was a "given" at that point. Thanks for the snark.

Is it possible that attending did have a bearing on your acceptance? Just not in a positive way?

This is a warning for all those who may be interested in applying to the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. A few weeks ago I attended the sociology department's recruitment event. I was told that invitees to this event were the committee's top applicants. Thus, I assumed that attending the event meant that my chances of admission were likely. However, after attending the event and spending roughly $900 on travel and hotel expenses (the department only reimbursed me for $300), I just found out that I have been waitlisted with little chance for funding. Strangely enough, another applicant who was unable to attend the recruitment event was admitted with full funding. Moral of the story: Do not attend this program's recruitment event unless you want to waste time and money. If I had known that attendance at the event would have no bearing on my acceptance, I would have never bothered going.

Sure, he's under a microscope as a sociologist who has mainstream fame. But the Sudhir hating gets old pretty fast. Especially at Columbia. I don't even have a stake in defending him...I just think it's tired.

He only teaches one or two grad classes a year, and I think there's typically a waitlist, but if I remember correctly most of the people on the waitlist end up getting into the class. If you'll be enrolled as a masters student, know that you'll only be able to take 3 electives total.

I'm not writing from UCLA.  I can say that a 56% average completion rate is low, but can be more complicated that it seems at first.  Remember this is a 5-10 year odyssey that you are embarking on.  Some people start immediately out of undergrad and apply to grad schools because of no clear alternative with a liberal arts background.  Once they go a couple of years into the program, they realize that this is not for them.  Others family issues intervene.  Others are older when they start the grad school process and decide that being back in school isn't what it is cracked up to be.  Others fail out.  In small cohorts, one or two students making individualized decisions, can sway statistics wildly.  At my school, we certainly want everyone capable of writing a dissertation to be able to successfully do so, but we also want it to be ok for people to mid-way decide that they want to do something else with their life.  Academic is very hard.  Research is very hard.  It is largely independent, with very little regular positive feedback.  You have to be internally self-directed in a way that is uncomfortable for a lot of people.  Our philosophy is we'd rather students determine that this field is not for them earlier in their career rather than later, so thinking about attrition rates, you'd rather see people in their 2nd and 3rd year quitting than people in year 7 & 8.
 
I don't know anything about the specifics of UCLA and how good their program is (other than that my department keeps wanting to hire their graduates!), so I am only writing this to suggest that you use that data point extremely cautiously.  It should not be a determining factor, but add it to the big pile of issues you are considering when thinking about different programs.

100-300 pages a week? That would be an incredibly light reading week. Many times we're expected to read upwards of 500-600 pages, sometimes more. 

Working a separate full-time job while in a PhD program is a terrible idea. 

That is insane.  Absolutely not.  The MAX I would work is 50% (this is about the same effort for a TA position at my school).  You are setting yourself up for failure.   Seriously.  The expectation is that students are doing coursework and research work all year and throughout the summer (even if unfunded).  Even teaching can be construed as part of the professional training program.  
 
You've got to decide what your goal is for a profession.  If you want it to be Sociology - you need to jump in with both feet.  If you want to continue your law enforcement career - AWESOME! - but don't bother with a Ph.D. it's too difficult a journey if you aren't fully committed.

I called BU today (I lied I made my partner call them) and they said they are not done making decisions and everyone will be notified by April 1st. Not all that helpful but at least we know they aren't done with the acceptances yet!

Yes, people who applied directly to the MA find out later. I don't know how many people they admit total but my cohort was 22 people.