PizzaCat93

I had this exact problem, and it's easily remedied. All you need to do is get in contact with the grants office at the school you'll be attending, and they'll know what to do.

It's an April Fools' joke.

Past winner here and current student. Sorry, but I've got to come out of the woodwork to question your comment. What do you mean by "research that shouldn't be funded?" Research is a public good, and that is why the government should fund it -- to incentivize its production. I know a GRFP grant seems like a ton of money to you, but as you can see here (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/), the "science" section of the federal budget is only 1% of the entire budget. That includes NSF, NASA, DOE, etc. Cutting NSF funding would do next to nothing to stop the federal debt. Plus, you're assuming that debt it as a bad thing; I won't go into that too much, but many developed countries in the world do not have balanced budgets. Most individuals don't either (mortgage, car payments, etc.). The reason people here and elsewhere are desperate for the GRFP or other grants is because in some fields (natural sciences), you need funding to go to grad school or do any research at all, and in other fields, such as mine, it has a huge impact on your career trajectory. That's why people are freaking out.

Well, what is your substantive interest? Also, today it is increasingly common for folks to not solely confine themselves to one region but rather to one substantive topic.

The other posters have #1 covered. As for #2, it's a fairly new program with lots of kinks and unknowns, but there is a thread here about it that can give some insight - If you go on the GROW website, you can see a list of possible countries (France is one) and from there you can look at peer institutions and such. As for #3, the only requirements are 1) that you fill out an annual report each year to ensure you're making satisfactory progress and 2) that you get training in IRB/ethics procedures. As for benefits, my school has a special seminar series only for NSF fellows; I'm not sure what others might have, as this tends to be school-specific.

How are they going to find out? Asking for LORs are the only way they would, but good professors want what is best for a student, so if it's clear that the student has a chance at a higher ranked PhD program, then I don't see why they'd be upset about that. I personally know someone who did this, and they did not have any negative consequences from doing so; it was certainly a good decision, career-wise. Also, it's not uncommon for people to leave with a masters, whether to enter the workforce or to transfer to another school. Funding isn't contingent on finishing the program; it's only contingent on being successful while you're there. imho, taking on debt for a nonprofessional masters is really not at all a good idea. You're looking at several years of a low stipend during a PhD program, then not-great job prospects after graduation. Post-docs rarely have a salary >$50k, and assistant professorships have starting salaries in the $60-70k range. Taking on ~$20k or more in debt for a terminal masters is not a good financial decision. If OP is seriously concerned about reputation, then it might be best to decline both offers and try again next year.

These Chicago masters programs are cash-cows, as you seem to realize. In my opinion, it'd be a much better plan to spend a year or two in your PhD program (say, until you get your masters there) and then apply again and try to get into a better program. Then, you have some grad experience under your belt but no debt. This is not a terribly uncommon path, and I know several people who've done it. I also know someone who went to one of these Chicago programs and ended up at a school ranked in the 40s, so in my opinion, it's not clear that the debt is worth it, by any means.

No, they did not accept anyone after April 15 last year; I stated that someone got accepted on April 15, after being notified much earlier that they were on the waitlist. As for the strange behavior, there is a different director of admissions this year, after several years of the previous one, so that could very well be the cause, although I'm obviously not certain.

That's a professional program, so no one here will probably have any advice. Try this forum instead - http://forum.thegradcafe.com/forum/11-government-affairs/

No, they won't care at all.

I'm a first year at UNC now. Myself and two others in my cohort of 13 were off the waitlist. They admit off the waitlist every year. So, you certainly have a chance. Although, note that one of us got accepted on April 15.

There might (emphasis on "might") be more announcements from UNC early this week. I walked by a conversation and heard something about the first round of acceptances already being out (as you all know) and that a second round would be coming out soon. But if this is wrong, please, no one be angry... I was in a rush to get to class!

Wrong forum. Go here - http://forum.thegradcafe.com/forum/11-government-affairs/

No, I'm at UNC, but OSU was one of my top choices.

@tkid86 and @dododo - I was admitted to OSU last year. Got the acceptance in January, got the funding in March. It's totally normal for them, but I know of no other schools that do that. At my visit, I met a couple people who did not get funding, so it does actually happen, be aware. Also, per last year's waitlist, they ended up getting a much higher number of students matriculating than they expected, so it's not surprising that someone off the waitlist would be lacking funding. I would say last year was an exceptional case, but be aware that they do give out unfunded offers. It's a great school, so good luck!

Congrats. I'm a first year at UNC if you (or anyone else) have any questions.

UNC would be a good option.

Do NOT, do not, DO NOT pay for a political theory program. Please.

1) Yes, it's okay for the application stage, but when it comes time to make your decision on where to go, think about this seriously - even ask the professors what their intentions are of staying or leaving (with the potentiality in mind that regardless, they may not get tenure). And have backups. Professors at any stage can leave, remember. 2) Totally fine. Topics like civil war and political economy very much blur the lines between IR and CP. One of my current professors is in IR but her primary advisor in grad school was a comparativist. It's normal. 3) You don't have to answer it if you don't want; it does not hurt or help you in any way. They are just interested in who they're competing with for you.

You have a good file, although if you can get your verbal above 160, that would be better. That being said, you really should shoot for higher ranked schools. You can apply to those you mentioned as sort of "safety schools" (some say there is no such thing as safety schools in graduate admissions, but I disagree), but you should really consider adding at least 3-4 top-20 schools and a few more top-40/50 schools. I think you definitely are competitive for higher ranked schools and would be doing yourself a disservice if you don't apply to at least some.

UNC, OSU, and Northwestern are very good for this. Also check out Stony Brook, Duke, Michigan. Your competitiveness of course depends on your stats, and if you're applying in the fall, you should get your list of schools together very very soon. Are you at USC? I'm also from South Carolina.

Wrong forum.

Northwestern has one of the best comparative-historical scholars in the field (James Mahoney) and also is more qualitatively-inclined than most other departments. UNC has two (three soon, perhaps) game theory people. Yale also may be a good one to check out. But the above post is correct that you're going to have to take quant methods anywhere you go. Honestly, look at the course catalog and course offerings at each program and see if it's satisfactory to you. Also check out sociology course offerings, if the department allows for taking courses outside the department. However, if you're going to base your list of schools on this, it's going to be a very short list. A better plan would be to just attend IQMR during a summer and teach yourself whatever else you need for your research.

What should be removed, exactly? I have peer-reviewed publications in decent journals from my time as an undergrad. I certainly should keep these, yes?

The application is now open for this year. If anyone is applying in political science, feel free to contact me; I won last year as an undergrad. There is truly a dearth of information out there for applications in most of the social sciences.