ultraultra

I was in a parallel situation last year -- I was completing a Master's, so I ended up spending most of the summer working on my thesis and finishing up courses right before (and honestly, slightly during) the beginning of my PhD. If I could do everything over, I would have planned to take a few months off before my program began, and in your case I would recommend taking off that summer semester from courses. Re: methods -- I'm not sure which school you are going to, but methods sequences at top US universities start from the beginning; they assume you have little to no knowledge of statistics and must be taught everything. Besides giving me a vague familiarity with the general concepts, the methods courses I took in my MA (also non-US) have not been very helpful in my PhD -- they were just at a much lower level of detail/quality than the ones I am taking now. I would have probably been better served by just spending some time brushing up on my math and learning calculus (for all the complaining I did about the irrelevance of GRE-Q scores last year, knowing that math better would have helped me a lot this year). Re: lifestyle -- only you can decide what's best for you here, but I doubt you would get to enjoy most of the benefits of living in a new city while taking a full course load, trying to adjust to a new life/program, and planning another big country move. Also working/saving money might not be the worst thing, if you're about to move to the United States. We have pretty good stipends in my program, but it's definitely not enough to go on big trips or buy all the things for my apartment that I would want. Re: brain turning to mush. I mean, this is fully in your control. The summer before the PhD would probably be a good time to read some of the books in your field that you've always wanted to read but haven't had a chance to -- you probably won't have any time to read them in the first year of your PhD. All in all, I wouldn't say that the people in my program who took the summer off have been substantially better off (in terms of relaxation, preparedness, etc) than the ones who didn't (and vice versa). But I certainly wish I had. Best of luck, and congrats on your acceptances!

I don't think you need to fully axe schools if there are only junior faculty to work with but I would recommend looking at where those assistant professors go their PhDs and considering adding those schools to your list.

Also look into Berkeley and NYU!

Would second Michigan, Stony Brook, Duke. I'd also suggest Stanford, UCLA, Vanderbilt, UVA, and maybe UCSD and Princeton. I don't check this website too often but I had good luck last cycle with a similar research focus, so feel free to message me and I can try to give you some advice. I'd also recommend checking out the results threads from previous cycles to get a sense of where behaviour people applied and where they were competitive given their stats.

Saudiwin is right, also many schools stipulate in their admissions directions that you can't coauthor your writing sample. For what its worth, I get the sense that most places don't pay that much attention to the writing sample. During my admit visits last year, not a single person mentioned my writing sample to me though people often mentioned my letters, SOP, research experience, etc.. I got the sense that no one had read it. I also had a bunch of appendices for my writing sample, which didn't fit in the page limit so I uploaded them separately and included a link in the document. They included important components of my experiment such as my treatment materials and coding manual. I recently, out of curiosity, checked how many people visited the link during my admit cycle. Only 2 did. And since I applied to 11 schools and got into 8, I would estimate that (at minimum) around 24 - 30 people were tasked with reading my file. To me this indicates, at the very least, that people aren't going over the sample with a fine tooth comb, if they are even reading it at all. Though this may be different if English isn't your first language.

I ended up choosing Harvard! So excited!!

No

As others have said, fit is very important. You should definitely think hard about what you want to study and mainly apply to departments where those needs would be supported. I applied to (and got into) Stony Brook and you should know - its basically only Americanists and methodologists there, with almost everyone self-identifying as a political psychologist. So I'm not sure that it makes sense for your interests unless you want to study those substantive topics from a political psychology perspective. I also think its worth it to throw an application or two at top schools where you have reasonably good fit - they sometimes admit people with lower numbers if the rest of their profile is good and their fit with the department is good. Definitely pour over the results threads, they're very informative.

yes both! maybe we met?

I'll probably add some but, just curious, why do you think it will "go a long way to help a lot of people"? At least in my opinion, it would have been nice to know stipend info in advance and I was certainly curious about it, but it wouldn't have had an impact on my applications... especially since most schools seem to give out stipends that provide a similar standard of living given the COL in the specific city.

I think Oxford has a migration studies program that fits what you're looking for. Though maybe your best bet is to look at researchers working in your ideal jobs and try to chart their education/professional history?

The schools you can get into without GRE scores (in the US at least) will not put you in a good position for the job market. Just take the GRE? There are some respectable schools that will still take you with weak scores if you have an otherwise strong file. Also - US political science is increasingly math driven, so you'll need to have that numeracy anyway (for your career, not just your applications). If you're really set on not taking the GRE, apply to other European schools or Canadian ones..

Turned down my Northwestern and Stony Brook offers (as well as UPenn and Vandy earlier), hopefully this helps someone in waitlist purgatory!

I don't think I would take on that much debt for an MA, especially a theory MA. If I were in your position, I'd probably try to find a research position or other way of building up my profile over the next year and then re-apply, including some cheaper MA programs in the mix next round (such as U of T which has a large group of theorists and a political theory MA). Or you could also check out European programs, some of which are quite affordable and haven't finished accepting applications yet.

I think the lack of responses on this and the other thread probably indicate that this is probably a question best addressed to your advisors and letter writers, or more specifically to people who know your field well. I don't feel qualified to give you an answer, though I feel bad that you've been left hanging. I don't know your field very well, personally, though from what you've said, your approach seems to be a lot more in line with sociology than political science, particularly the heavy reliance on theory - most fields in political science are moving in a much more empirical (and quantitative) direction. What I can give you is some generic advice, which I've been previously given about my interdisciplinary interests: think about where you want to end up. Do you have a strong preference for ending up in a sociology department, or a political science department? Is there one type of department where you think your research needs would be supported more? Then perhaps choose that type of department for your graduate work. If you don't have a strong preference, then think about your options for field-switching: is it the case that sociology departments hire political scientists, but not the opposite? Or vice versa? You'll want to go to the school/department that will make you most competitive on the job market in 5 years, so think about what type of program will give you the most options/make you the most competitive for the specific types of opportunities you're interested in. With the interdisciplinary programs, look into their placements and see if they mesh with your goals. In the end, you might want to apply to both sociology and political science programs, and there's no harm in that!

Good luck!!

How are everyone's visits/decision-making processes going?

Didn't you post this thread before?

I've talked to a few people about this, since my work straddles communications also. Communications PhDs are less 'marketable' in political science departments than political science PhDs. Generally speaking, you really only ever see senior faculty moving from a communications department to a political science one, you don't really see ABDs getting hired from communications programs into political science departments. If your long-term goal is to get hired directly into a political science department, I would advise you get a political science PhD at a school where the comm dept and the political science dept have a strong relationship (e.g. Michigan, UPenn, I think UVA also - @Bubandis would know).

For me, I think it's a few things. I think the biggest disincentive is that I personally didn't find other peoples' SOPs all that useful. I perused some of them too, and imho, the ones that got people into great schools were often quite different from one another, and sometimes they had a whole lot in common with the ones of applicants with less success. It wasn't really easy to parse out some sort of 'perfect SOP formula' from previous SOPs (whereas its somewhat more feasible to determine a 'perfect applicant formula' from info on research experience/recommenders/GPAs/GREs etc). So except for the general structure (of which there are already many examples on this forum and off of it, and which I explained in my results post), I generally didn't think it would really be all that helpful to post my SOP. And I didn't want people in the future to read it over and over again looking for some non-existent magical formula for getting into Harvard. Not to mention that my sense is that SOPs aren't even that important relative to the things you actually put into them in terms of research experience. So altogether I decided that posting a detailed account of my file was more useful than posting my SOP. As for other reasons... there are a few. Thousands of people lurk these forums, and while I'm a bit nervous about people stealing my ideas, I am much more nervous about someone potentially stealing my SOP, as in copy-pasting it in its entirety and then replacing my accolades with theirs. I write with a somewhat distinct and personal 'voice,' so I found that possibility pretty unnerving. There's also the anonymity aspect. I'm sure if someone knew me well IRL, they could probably figure out who I am from my results post (and actually I recognized a now-friend from their posts here), but I do generally appreciate the shred of anonymity I have to post about my anxieties about the process here, and posting a very personal life story document would undermine that a lot. Related to the fact is that my SOP is basically just me listing all of my projects and accolades, so by the time I redacted enough of it to curb my desire for anonymity, it would have been a shred of a document. There are a few other minor reasons. but I'd say that's the main rationale.

I was in this position last year and the schools happily gave me extension! I just said I was considering ______ University strongly but wanted to ensure I had full information and had heard from everyone before making nay decisions. It's gonna be okay! And congrats on your offers!

I would probably write a humble e-mail to the DGS that asks if they would be willing to chat with you about your application, or if they could put you in contact with whoever chaired the relevant subfield committee on the ad comm. Though I'd wait a little - not only would it be good to cool down a bit, but all the DGSes are in the midst of graduate recruiting right now, which presumably won't calm down until May or so. They'll probably be more receptive to talking to you then.

Hope everyone's holding up okay... the last week or so seems to have been quite a bloodbath.

I didn't apply there but a few people I met were talking about going to a visit there soon, so I think decisions have been released. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news!

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 3 Canadian university Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science Undergrad GPA: Between 3.82 and 3.92 depending on how you calculate it. Type of Grad: Top 3 Canadian university (Political Science MA) Grad GPA: None at time of application. GRE: 168V 158Q 5.5AW Any Special Courses: During undergrad: grad seminar in political psych, summer school on experimental methods. During MA: 2 PhD-level statistics courses, 2 independent studies on topics relevant to my substantive interests. Letters of Recommendation: Apparently all very strong, from political scientists who know me well and work in fields relevant to my research interests. Sent all four when possible, otherwise alternated #3 and #4 depending on who had better connections to the school. 1. Famous/respected senior scholar who co-supervised my Honours thesis. 2. Rising star junior scholar who I am RAing for and co-authoring with during my MA. 3. Untenured AP who co-supervised my Honours thesis and taught a seminar I took. 4. Tenured professor who I RAed for during undergrad and am currently co-authoring with. Research Experience: - Honours thesis (experiments, top grade in the thesis program) - Several consecutive RAships spanning ~3 years - 3 quantitative working papers with various faculty - Research grant to conduct a survey at my undergrad institution - Two undergrad publications Teaching Experience: None Subfield/Research Interests: Political psychology, political communication, experimental methods. Other: former Editor-in-Chief of undergraduate journal, prestigious MA fellowship. RESULTS: Acceptances($$ or no $$): Harvard ($$), Michigan ($$), UCSD($$), NYU ($$), Northwestern ($$), Stony Brook ($), UPenn (*), Vanderbilt (*). Waitlists: None Rejections: Berkeley, Stanford, Princeton. Pending: None Going to: Will decide after visits. * Declined before they sent funding info LESSONS LEARNED: Many, have spent a long time thinking about this. While putting together your file: - Be strategic about your reference letters, if possible. If you have multiple people willing to recommend you, try to think about how they each bring something different to your file as well as have credibility with different groups you hope to reach. - Not everyone will agree with me here but: de-politicize your file. I’m someone who has done a lot of activism and electoral politics in the recent past. I made a point to focus on my academic achievements in my file, and to try and make my google results more professional (to limited success). Why? Because (I’ve heard) ad comms are very wary of people pursuing graduate studies as a way to change the world who don’t understand what academia is like + because it's impossible to know who is on the committee and what they value/believe politically + because there’s already limited space in the application. - Do an MA. Whether this is a feasible option of course depends on where you are. In Canada, there are lots of well-respected & fully-funded MA programs, and I received a scholarship/RAship, which meant it wasn’t a sunk cost. Not only did my MA make me more competitive for PhD programs (by giving me way more research experience and methodological expertise) but it also was a great experience to spend a year working with new mentors. I wouldn’t have wanted to do my PhD at this school for myriad reasons, but I am very grateful to have had the chance to spend a year here to diversify my academic experiences, strengthen my application profile, and become that much more sure that I wanted to be an academic. - Anticipate your weaknesses and try to counteract them. I knew that my methods background would be thin for a lot of top schools so, as much as possible, I spent the last 8 months before applications building up my stats chops. I think this helped in general, and I think it helped counteract my GRE Q. In addition - get your references to speak to your weaknesses in their letters. And, if your school doesn’t have an endemic of grade inflation, get them to mention that as well. N of 1, but I think this helped. - If you have time, submit the January applications when you submit the December ones. This allows you to enjoy your winter holidays in peace instead of scampering last minute to remember how to do things. - Letters often do not come in on time. Don’t panic if your reviewers are a few days late, though of course send a gently-worded reminder. - Start preparing early for both the GRE and the essays. The GRE sucks. Studying for the GRE sucks. If you do a little bit of studying every week over a long period of time, and take it early enough to allow a real take, you’ll save yourself so much anxiety. As for the SOP: it’s been said on previous versions of this thread but your first SOP will be total garbage. Start it (at least) the summer before graduating, and revisit every 2-4 weeks. Ask your letter writers to review it, and PhD students you trust. And - a mistake I made - don’t forget that it’s not just one long SOP. Some schools want a short one (~500 words). And some schools want a SOP that’s about research + a separate Personal Statement that’s about your personal journey. While I wouldn’t recommend sending out all 3 documents for frequent edits, you should draft all these separate documents early. While waiting for decisions: - Personally, I don’t think its a good idea to cold-email POIs before getting a decision from the department. Every professor I talked to said they get hundreds of these e-mails and view them as a nuisance more than anything. There’s a good chance your POI isn’t even on the committee, and it’s unlikely that a professor will be willing to go to bat for you with the ad comm after just a few e-mails. If your letter writers know your POI, get them to e-introduce you or to just mention you to the POI (even so, this may have no effect besides making you feel more in control of your destiny). Otherwise, hold tight. - Limit your access to this site. I’m serious. This website is extremely useful during the pre-application process, as you put together your package. And while decisions are rolling out, it can be nice to commiserate with other applicants. However, so much of the information on these forums (and on the results page!) is simultaneously stressful and useless. Limiting your access to this site is the difference between getting an e-mail notification about your rejection (quick like a band-aid) versus agonizing for hours or days or even weeks over whether/when the rejection will come and if maybe, just maybe, you’re on a waitlist they didn’t tell you about yet. If I could do it all again, I would just look at these pages for tips while putting my application together, jot down rough timelines to hear decisions, and then never log in again. (Psst: https://selfcontrolapp.com/) - When you inevitably ignore the above: try not to pay too much attention to when other people get their results. Sometimes other peoples’ results are a clue that bad (or good) news is coming. Sometimes they mean nothing at all. I was convinced I was rejected by Vanderbilt for several weeks, when it turned out they just didn’t feel the need to interview me. I got an interview by Stony Brook several weeks earlier than most people, but all of us got accepted at the same time. At my MA institution, I heard back 2 weeks later than the first round of admits because they were finalizing my scholarship. No news is not bad news - it’s no news. - Try to remember how idiosyncratic this process is. We have a tendency to assume everything is planned and down to an exact science. It’s not. Based on this site, I was worried my GRE scores would bar me from admission at CHYMPS, and then basically every professor I talked to said it depended who was on the committee. Similarly, some folks on this forum tried to predict the exact date admissions decisions would be released based on previous years. Realistically, the committees release decisions when they make them, and when they make them is based mostly on when they’re able to actually meet. Lower-ranked schools have an incentive to release early as to convince you early, whereas highly-ranked schools know they’ll fill their quotas no matter what so they can release whenever. Attempting to calculate the exact date of offers or the exact GRE scores you need to get in - these are futile exercises. All you can do is improve your file to the best of your ability and hope it works out. SOP: Not comfortable sharing it but the structure was as so: opened with a vignette about becoming interested in political psych —> discussed my general research interests —> discussed a specific set of questions I’d be interested in answering in my dissertation —> hinted at methodology I’d hope to use —> discussed my research experience and credentials chronologically —> discussed what drew me to the specific school including POIs, institutes/centres, and annual events —> ended with a line about intending to pursue an R1 TT position post-grad. Good luck!