curiousgeorge84

I disagree. It really depends how you write it. I went highly highly personal in the first paragraph of my statement. It's so personal I won't post it. Some people thought I was out of my mind and that I should change it and others said I wrote it just right. Let me say it was balanced with a very focused research proposal and research history. When I was offered early acceptance to my program, I was told that it was my statement that made me stand out from everyone else. Just don't give B.S. personal that's 'cute' or doesn't have to do with your course of study.

I truly apologize for using words that put it in the wrong way. I wasn't digging up posts but had just found the thread and was so interested that I read it from beginning to end. I know that affirmative action can be frustrating. Personally I am opposed to race-based affirmative action and am in favor of socioeconomic considerations due to the unequal U.S. system where property taxes pay for education. I believe a poor white person from a bad school district should get consideration over a wealthy black person. I only think that just as I should have thought before using the words 'race bashing,' which is not exactly what I meant, people should also stop and think before jumping on the bandwagon of pointing out all the minorities who get priority without acknowledging that there are so many others without academic qualifications who do as well. On the topic of the thread, I disagree with the concept that if you don't get into a top 25 you won't get a job. I just accepted at Rutgers before even hearing from Columbia and a number of other schools because it truly is the best fit for my research and besides great funding, they are offering me a lot of professional support. Before accepting, I asked for not only the placement statistics for the past ten years, but also the schools and types of positions graduates obtained. Rutgers is a top 50 but not a top 25. They have a fantastic placement rate and at least 1/3 of the students each year obtained tenure track positions right away. Last year a Rutgers graduate beat out a Princeton graduate for a position.

I didn't mean to offend. I wasn't implying you were a racist or anything I just wanted to make a point. It is very difficult for successful minorities in higher education because the first thing people think is that we are in a school because of affirmative action and not because of our abilities. I wanted to point out that there are many more athletes than minorities getting in not on merit, but everyone points to minorities and affirmative action first. You know a person is a minority just by looking at them but you don't know someone is an athlete right away. I'm not judging you, I'm just sick of people using minorities as the go to example. It's hard enough to get into a top school by working hard and achieving, but when you're a minority you feel like you have to constantly prove you deserve to be there and you aren't a charity case. Maybe that's because affirmative action is used too much incorrectly and hurts those who truly do succeed. I don't think that athletes or some other groups get singled out as much in the same way. By the way I'm not bashing athletes. One of my best friends was a basketball player with a 4.0 GPA.

I don't know what you want to go into but I went to an ivy undergrad and did my M.A. at AUC and I just got into a PhD program as a comparativist focusing on the Middle East. If you are applying to a PhD program and want to focus on the Middle East, an advisor focusing on the region will have more respect for a student who has spent time and studied there, not just read books about it.

Congrats to everyone who got into MIT today!

I didn't intend to describe the process as predestined. I was rejected from a school that I thought was a fantastic fit. What I meant is that what I think gave me an edge in a horrible year to apply was the focus of my statement. Actually, when they called to accept me they said my SOP set me apart from everyone else and the professor kept mention things from my SOP. I just wanted to give the advice that the SOP can really make the difference when there a bunch of people with the same scores and same number of publications. I had three UN internships where I worked directly with ambassadors and three publications and all they wanted to talk about was my SOP. There is no one reason why you get accepted or rejected and sometimes it really is that there were too many great applicants. I just think the SOP is one of the best ways to make you stand out.

What I'm trying to say is that you really have to do your research. Example, Lisa Anderson is listed as a professor at Columbia, but she is currently the Provost at AUC in Egypt and rumor has it she won't be coming back. A professor could be on leave or about to go on leave and won't be part of the admissions process. It really is a crap shoot and I'm truly blessed that I was admitted early to a department I really like and who are really interested in my research. All I'm saying is the more you focus your research proposal in your SOP and demonstrate the connection between what you want to do and the research of a full professor in the department, the more you're upping your chances. I think that too many people are throwing their money away on 10+ applications. If the department doesn't really fit your research, then you probably don't fit the department.

I think the race bashing on this thread is disgusting. I happen to be half black female and got into an ivy league school based on my grades and activities. I also graduated from my undergrad with a double major with honors and because of my high standing was appointed to a university search committee. While I do understand that there are minorities at top schools that don't deserve to be there, there are also football players, pianists, white New York Upper East Side kids with connections and money, and many more who didn't have the top academic qualifications. I had to tutor a white football player who used one period at the end of a long paragraph and separated sentences with commas. Having the highest SAT scores does not necessarily point to academic creativity or depth of thought, or maybe your essay wasn't good enough. All I'm saying is stop pointing only to race and see all the other people who got in ahead of you for reasons other than pure academic merit.

I disagree. I only applied to 6 schools and I'm already into a place that truly is the best fit and I haven't heard from three of them yet. My research exactly matches the research of the professor with whom I'm going to work. I think that you really need to research the professors at the schools to which you are applying and match your research to them. Make sure its a full professor who has more sway in the decision making process. If a professor sees your proposed plan of study and is excited by what you want to do, he is more likely to push to admit you. GPA, GRE scores, and achievements are really just the beginning. If you are applying for a PhD they want to know that you are already focused, because your class papers in the program should be directed toward the subject upon which you want to write your dissertation. Also, it's not number of schools, its range. How many safeties and levels? Everyone should go into this assuming they won't make it into a top 10 or 20 because sometime 4.0GPA and 1600 GREs doesn't cut it, if 500 other people have the same scores and same number of publications.

In addition to the acceptance posts, there is a girl from Lebanon attending who focuses on women in the Arab world.

On my funding and admissions letter it said, in so many words, to let them know as soon as possible because someone else could get my funding if I wasn't going to attend. I just accepted their offer today. They may have given a certain number of funding offers and are waiting for replies so they can sort out who gets what. If someone declines, then another student can get the full funding or whatever is being offered.

In an act of insanity, or just understanding the meaning of good fit, I just accepted Rutgers without hearing from Columbia and two other schools. My advisor there best matches my research interests, they expressed a commitment to supporting my professional development, and they gave me really good funding.

Once the waitlist goes out, doesn't that mean that the acceptances are finished? How can people be on a waitlist if they are still deciding who to accept?

NEPA, just wondering. Why haven't you accepted Rutgers yet? Have they told you about funding?

Am I the only one who still hasn't heard from Columbia. I called the department and they said that admissions handles it. I sent an email to admissions today asking if the Friday acceptances and wait lists meant that I was rejected, or if my application was still under consideration, but I got no response. What do you guys think? Were the comparativists already accepted?

I actually wasn't told I was the nominee for the University Fellowship, but if I am that would be great. I don't know if you looked at my profile but I'm also a comparativist with a Middle East focus. I am interested in Islamist movements, authoritarianism, democratization, Bedouin, Shi'i political thought, and the relationship between economic conditions and political violence. I saw you studied in Jordan. I lived in Egypt for three years. I think that Eric Davis is pushing for a lot of Middle East people this year, which is really exciting.

Hey! I just joined the forum. I got accepted to Rutgers in January and just went for a visit. I'm pretty sure I'm going to say yes to Rutgers on Monday. What's your field? Do you have a regional focus?