changeisgood

Yeah this kind of crap happens, I've seen it too. Unless it affects your grade my advice is just blow it off. This semester there have been a couple of times where I've made a comment that the professor and a few other students blew off as silly and ignorant, only to have the prof. make the same observation a few weeks later and call it brilliant. I put this down to 2 things: 1) your fellow students don't know any more than you do, but they like to sound like they do, and 2) professors are absent-minded and concerned more with their own stuff than yours.

ditto on that. With the Penn State rejection I received today, my cycle is officially over (even though technically it was last Friday when I accepted an offer). Unfortunately I can't edit my post on the results thread, but, no biggie.

*raises hand* That's my situation. Being older and having real job experience means that I have different (some would say stronger) motivations to complete a program well and quickly, and get out on the job market, than someone who has time to hang around in grad school wondering if they would really rather be doing something else. I'm pretty sure I could have completed the program at Michigan or Ohio State, but being out of school for so long, my math skills had degraded to the point where I couldn't get a competitive GRE score so that I had a chance at the top 15. I can do the work, I'm just not very fast at it. You don't have to be fast when writing a journal article or a book, in fact it's better if you're not. That's one way in which the GRE is not a good indicator of success.

I can vouch for that as well. I ended up in my current M.A. program because last cycle was extremely competitive, more applicants than they've had in years, and they just couldn't get me into the PhD program. Turned out well for me, though, as this time around I got into a much better program with better funding! Another interesting thing is that roughly 40% of the "very competitive" cohort here dropped out after the first year, FWIW. My waitlist letter from Indiana also mentioned an unusually high number of qualified applicants this year (although they didn't give numbers).

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad Institution: R1 State University Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science Undergrad GPA: 2.6 (long time ago) Type of Grad: M.A. Poli. Sci. 2017 (plus previous J.D.) Grad GPA: 3.7 GRE: 169V/152Q/4.5AW Any Special Courses: Full stats sequence plus a Bayesian course; ICPSR Letters of Recommendation: 2 members of my M.A. committee (one is DGS), plus our Dept. Chair, and a couple other tenured faculty to spread things around Research Experience: Master's Thesis and conference paper based on it Teaching Experience: TA and instructor of record for American Gov. gen. ed. course Subfield/Research Interests: AP/Judicial Politics/Public Law, Mass Media/New Media, APD, Game Theory Other: Back in grad school after 20+ years of practicing law. Undergrad GPA was pretty irrelevant as a result (thankfully). Tons of prior public law experience with government agencies and legislature. RESULTS: Acceptances($$ or no $$): Georgia($$), Oklahoma($$) Waitlists: Indiana Rejections: Rice Pending: Penn State, Texas A&M Going to: Georgia LESSONS LEARNED: I'm not your typical PhD applicant, so take this for what it's worth. Fit, fit, fit. Did I mention fit? I believe there are two main reasons I didn't get more acceptances: one, my low quant GRE kept me out of the top 20; and two, my SOP was too tailored for one program (see below). I was told my age wouldn't be a factor, but there's no way to be sure it wasn't. For most of you reading this, that won't be an issue. But the main reason is fit. That said, I got into where I wanted to go with full funding, so it's all good. I was hoping for more options though. SOP: Don't feel comfortable sharing it, but format-wise it pretty much followed dagnabbit's. In hindsight I think I may have over-tailored it to UGA, because I had previously met one POI in Michigan and knew a lot about the program from my current dept. chair who got his PhD there. Yeah, his recommendation letter helped a lot I'm sure, but he has connections at most of the other places I applied also, and it didn't help. Plus my thesis advisor is a TAMU PhD and his letter didn't help, so...connections are good, but they are not a solution to everything. I did have a section of my SOP that I changed for each school I applied to, to make it specific, but the bulk of it was the same. I really wanted to study game theory/EITM and courts, rather than big data analytics or fancy stat methods. This probably limited my appeal with the Big 10 schools. Again, fit.

Yesterday I pulled the trigger on UGA, so I'm officially done and dusted. Received an email from one of my POIs that was very persuasive, so that sort of kicked me off the fence. I needed to get this wrapped up anyway so I can get on with finishing my M.A. on time. I sent Indiana a note to take me off the waiting list, so hopefully someone else can have the spot if one opens up.

You really seemed to draw a lot of negative attention this cycle. Hope the acceptances you get are just as nice as the rejections are nasty.

This. I informed one of my acceptances that a little more scratch would nudge me in the right direction, and they did indeed bump me.

Waitlisted by Indiana. Email from Dept. this afternoon.

I suspect that I might be on a couple of "unofficial wait lists", but nothing solid. It would help if they'd notify me! *argh*

Thanks @Determinedandnervous, I received similar advice from one of the profs in my dept. last week. The more you can teach, the better, and it's almost a must to have at least one publication before you graduate (preferably a solo-authored article). Many programs in the lower tiers and LACs are trying to beef up their UG departments right now, so if you can teach even UG methods, it's a *big plus* (grad level methods even better). Even a research design or intro to stats class for sophomores (and honestly most of us should be able to do this) will go far. Also, if you can teach policy or public admin UG classes, that's another bonus. She recommended taking a course during your PhD in one or the other so you can speak the language and publish in the journals, esp. if you're in a subfield that crosses over easily (like AP). However, comparativists are now getting into policy and admin, too. I personally have a lot of work experience in bureaucracy, so with a little prep I could even teach MPA classes and I hope that will give me a bump on the job market. Do these things, and your chances of getting a TT job increase dramatically, no matter where your PhD is from.

My first cycle I was able to get in as a terminal M.A., and because of that I figured out what I needed to be successful this time (and it worked). First off, the most important thing you can do is have a solid SOP with well-defined research goals. Only choose programs to apply that have at least 2 tenured faculty members researching in areas close to what you want to study, and be as specific as possible. Most of the SOP should deal with research interests, professors, and how well you fit with the program. Fit, fit, fit. Second, it is vital to have the best rec letters you can get, all 3 from tenured faculty in your field if possible. I had one adcom chair tell me that if a professor he trusted said that student x is a rock star, he would put a whole lot more weight on that than a high GPA and a GRE in the 160s. Having something published is obviously a plus also, but programs are more concerned about whether you can complete the curriculum and form a dissertation committee. Stats are important if you are aiming at a top 15 program, so if that's what you want, make sure your GRE is up to snuff. If you want to get in somewhere that teaches high-level quantitative chops you need a high math score and some background in it. Otherwise, I would have a professor you trust read over your SOP. That's what I did, that and a successful M.A. program got me where I wanted to go.

I didn't see too many public policy/public admin folks on this thread, but just in case...I declined an offer from Oklahoma this morning. If anyone knows anyone who's interested, just wanted to put that out there. Policy/Admin is a specialty of OU and their placement is much better in those fields than their program rank would indicate. That being said, if you're a reasonably good candidate, they'd probably take you no matter what your subfield is.

Very nice. The chance to work with Gelman is one in a lifetime. I wish you the best.

Yeah, someone needs to re-word that letter, it probably didn't come out the way they intended. Probably written by a jaded tenured full Prof (there's one in my current department who would write one *exactly* like that on purpose :)). That said, I have noticed an interesting phenomenon that the harshness of the communication seems to be inversely proportional to the ranking of the program. Totally unscientific, of course. Someone should write a paper on that.