tkid86

Do you still have a chance at any school at all? Yes. That being said, your current score will probably not make it past the first cut at many places. From what I've heard, admissions committees often use stats like GRE/GPA to make a long list out of the initial application pool, and a very low Q score might lead to your app being thrown out before they even see your application materials. Your GRE score is not the defining element of your application by a long shot, but the truth is that many programs have score cutoffs/quotas/etc., and you don't want to be rejected simply because you fell on the wrong side of these. There are a lot of good arguments out there about why the continued use of the GRE in graduate admissions is problematic, but for now it's still part of the dance. You should retake the test if it is within your means to do so. I would recommend purchasing/renting/obtaining the Manhattan Prep series on the quantitative section, as they really try to provide a complete understanding of the mathematical/logical concepts that underlie the questions on the test.
One last thing: I disagree with your postscript. Political science is a pretty quantitative discipline, and IR is probably the second most quant-heavy subfield behind American politics. Everyone who studies IR at the graduate level will at least be required to read and understand quant research, and admissions committees will be looking for signals of quantitative literacy regardless of your specific research interests. Of course you can do qualitative IR research, but I just wanted to make the point that it's probably best to get comfortable with quantitative analysis instead of writing it off.

Many, though not all, PhD programs will provide minimum standards which applicants must meet to be considered. They will also make it clear that these minimums are not necessarily enough to be actually admitted as they receive a great many more well-qualified candidates for just a few spots. I think the first step for you would be to make a list of the top five or ten schools you are interested in, go to the poli sci department website for each school and find information on the admissions process and standards. This is more rare, but some schools also publish the profile of previous years' incoming class. Compare this information to your current profile and make a plan for how you make your application more competitive. A lot of programs will say that a weak gpa can be compensated for with outstanding GREs and/or writing sample.

I also had concerns about my undergrad GPA. A few suggestions, based in part on things that worked (or at least seemed to work) for me:
A masters degree can be an excellent way to make up for a less-than-stellar undergraduate GPA. It might be worth looking into some options. The one caveat is that, all else being equal, this is probably not a smart tactic if it involves a big financial investment on your part.  If your grades in relevant subjects (PT? Political science more generally?) are significantly better than your overall grades, then that can help assuage the impact of your 3.10. Make sure you point that out explicitly and, if possible, in some detail. I personally added an additional document highlighting my major GPA and the grades I received in each political science class I took.  As stated above, a great GRE can also help. Make sure you crush that thing. All of it.  In terms of explaining earlier grades, my personal opinion is that that stuff belongs in the letters of recommendation. Why? Because it gives the explanations greater credibility, because it avoids the appearance of you trying to make excuses, and because it doesn't take up precious SoP room. For what it's worth, I got into (almost every) school for which I followed this strategy, and got rejected from the (2-3) places where I myself addressed early weaknesses in my transcript.  In general, I am a strong believer that a less-than-great undergrad GPA can be overcome. A great SoP, a great writing sample, and—above all else—great letters of recommendation are key. With that being said, sometimes admissions committees face constraints that they truly aren't able to do much about. Some universities, for example, tie funding to minimum GPA requirements. So my final bit of advice echoes @printerdrop's: look into the programs you are interested in to get a better sense of what is and isn't doable. If possible, try to go beyond whatever information is publicly available and talk to people at those places / people who know those places well. There is a lot that departments don't say publicly. 
Good luck!

To second @Comparativist's comment about being strategic when declaring your subfield... be mindful of the programs to which you are applying, too, if you straddle subfields. If, for instance, you applied to a program very strong in IR, you may have to compete with a number of other IR applicants. It is possible that applying as CP could provide a bit more wiggle room, especially if they have any sort of quota for an incoming cohort in regards to numbers and subfield. I had a professor suggest that I apply to some programs as political theory rather than IR... and I didn't listen, but it did work out in the end (for me). So, just some food for thought.

There are plenty of applicants (and students and scholars!) that straddle the line between IR and CP. It's not a big deal to be slightly ambiguous in respect to those two subfields IF there is a obvious reason for it and you have a clear and concise proposed project in your SOP. 
You may also want to be strategic with respect to competitiveness. From past cycles, the comparative subfields were thought by many to be more competitive than IR in regards to available spots vs. applicants. I believe this fluctuates from year to year though. Might be something to think about when declaring your 'first' subfield.

Honestly, I think that you should start by seeking guidance from your former professors. GradCafe is very helpful regarding certain aspects of the application process (GRE studying tips, SOP advice, Interview advice, etc), but not so much when it comes to something as major as choosing a field of study. Sure, we can list all of the best places to study political psychology, but we can't really tell you whether you should be studying political psychology or not. You should contact a professor who knows you and knows your work and have a conversation with them regarding your research interests and how to best pursue them.
 

I know we hear "quantitative, quantitative, quantitative", but I think it also has a lot to do with the programs to which you are applying and what you are hoping to do research-wise. I have a very weak quantitative background (and a worse Q GRE than you), but I don't anticipate pursuing much quantitative research, and I made my research interests (and methodological interests) fairly clear throughout my application. It really depends on what you are hoping to do, and whether or not you need to demonstrate that you can do that work if it is necessary for the research projects that you want to pursue.

I know we hear "quantitative, quantitative, quantitative", but I think it also has a lot to do with the programs to which you are applying and what you are hoping to do research-wise. I have a very weak quantitative background (and a worse Q GRE than you), but I don't anticipate pursuing much quantitative research, and I made my research interests (and methodological interests) fairly clear throughout my application. It really depends on what you are hoping to do, and whether or not you need to demonstrate that you can do that work if it is necessary for the research projects that you want to pursue.

Your post is kind of confusing. Are you saying that you would be interested in either academic political theory, public policy, or law school, but that your main requirement is staying close to home? You sound like you're not quite sure why you want to go to grad school - my advice is to do some soul-searching to figure out your career goals before you spent tens of thousands of dollars and years of your life on a degree. Of course, maybe I just misunderstood your post, in which case I am sorry.

Your best bet might be to look outside of the U.S. academy but you might also need to consider a discipline change if you want to pursue postcolonial studies (even in the context of IR/polisci). 

Hey all, this isn't my application season (post in last year's thread here), but I did want to impart a bit of advice. It is likely that your research interests overlap somewhere with another member of this forum. While you're all still on this forum (as most of you will likely never return after the beginning of grad school), I encourage you, if you are comfortable with doing so, to talk to each other privately and de-anonymize. Networking is a huge part of how you fare on the market, and it does not hurt to start today. So turn to each other and start talking, arrange to meet each other at conferences, and possibly co-author something once you feel ready to do so.
This is not empty advice. I am currently co-authoring a project with a (former?) active user of this forum, who I will leave nameless unless they wish to announce themselves, and it's looking promising. The type of people who self-select into GradCafe are usually ahead of the game, and all of you this year were no exception. So get networking!

April 15 is right around the corner. And I am pleased to say that I just formally accepted an offer this morning (and rejected one, so hopefully that clears up a spot for somebody on the waitlist). It still hasn't sunk in yet.

Hi! This is my personal experience this application cycle: I did not have any firm offers until very recently, when I got off the waitlist at two different programs. I stayed in constant contact with the DGAs at these two programs (particularly with the director at the program that was my first choice), and I believe that it played a big role in eventually receiving an offer.
Seeing as it is very close to the April 15th deadline, you really have nothing to lose (and potentially a lot to gain!) by e-mailing the graduate admissions director at Georgetown. Waitlists are fluid and I think that expressing your strong interest in the program can only put you in a better position. Good luck, I hope you receive an offer soon! 

April 15 is right around the corner. And I am pleased to say that I just formally accepted an offer this morning (and rejected one, so hopefully that clears up a spot for somebody on the waitlist). It still hasn't sunk in yet.

April 15 is right around the corner. And I am pleased to say that I just formally accepted an offer this morning (and rejected one, so hopefully that clears up a spot for somebody on the waitlist). It still hasn't sunk in yet.

April 15 is right around the corner. And I am pleased to say that I just formally accepted an offer this morning (and rejected one, so hopefully that clears up a spot for somebody on the waitlist). It still hasn't sunk in yet.

Just accepted an offer. Really excited/anxious for this!

I just accepted an offer and declined several others. I hope that helps some people who are waiting on waitlists!

Miracles happen. FINALLY got my Georgetown rejection. 

Today I decided for OSU. I hope this means somebody can get good news from the other programs that accepted me.
Still have to hear definitively from Notre Dame, but to assume rejection at this point is better.

I just wanted to make a post again here... if you've been accepted to Ohio State and don't intend to attend, please let them know as soon as possible. I've been waitlisted for funding and would very much like to go there.
(I am also waiting to hear from Georgetown, still.)

BFB said the end of February would be likely, so I'm expecting it soon. Just wasn't sure if the info came out and I wasn't yet aware.

I second this question. @correlatesoftheory, your signature notes $ from OSU? Have you received official word?

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Mid-tier private liberal arts university
Major(s)/Minor(s): International relations and cultural anthropology; certificate in international studies
Undergrad GPA: 4.0, Magna cum laude, honors in both departments
Type of Grad: N/A but did take two graduate-level courses during UG
Grad GPA: 4.0
GRE: 162V | 155Q | 5.5AW
Any Special Courses: qualitative methods; research methods in political science; self-designed independent reading course
Letters of Recommendation: mixture of UG tenure-track professors (always 2 IR [1 tenured] and 1 anthro)
Research Experience: undergraduate thesis (for anthropology), all qualitative
Teaching Experience: N/A
Subfield/Research Interests: IR but interests intersect subfields | critical security; discourse; terrorism
Other: The writing sample I submitted was the introduction to my senior thesis for anthropology
RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Ohio State University (TBD), University of Maryland ($$)
Waitlists: Syracuse
Rejections: Washington University, Yale, Johns Hopkins
Pending: Georgetown (likely rejection)
Going to: Still pending, but fairly sure I know where I'll be going [and will update here once I've made the official decision]
LESSONS LEARNED: I only had three months to research and select schools, as well as put together and submit my applications by the time I decided that I was going to apply to graduate school. I had to submit everything two months before the deadlines because of an opportunity that arose that I could not turn down, which would put me outside the country and without reliable internet access (and at times, access to the application websites even when internet was available). In the end, however, I think this likely helped me from over-thinking my applications. I had to be on point and confident in what I submitted. (I am not immune to the freak-out, however; once results started rolling in, I joined the pack of panicked applicants.)
Overall, I cannot emphasize enough what previous cycles have demonstrated: fit matters. I emphasized my interdisciplinarity and my background in anthropology and political science, which likely helped and hindered me at different schools. I excelled in both of my departments in undergraduate, but I approached political science from an anthropological lens (and focused my anthropology studies on political anthropology); I sought to demonstrate the benefits of this interdisciplinary background. I also focused on my training and interest in critical theory, even while knowing the spaces and opportunities to study and practice such in the U.S. are few and far between. I know that my less common background and my research interests helped me stand out at my top choice school to which I was admitted and will be attending. Overall, I think my strong letters of recommendation are what helped me compensate for “lower” GRE scores and my undergraduate background from a small LAC lacking in reputation. That being said, I think I could have applied to some different programs that may have been better fits than the D.C.-area schools, but hindsight is 20/20.
My general advice, in no particular order:
Start studying for the GRE early and don’t neglect verbal because you think you’re strong there or vice versa for quantitative. Invest in prep books (and maybe find friends that are also studying and split the cost); they do help, at least as refreshers.  Don’t panic over your GRE scores (or GPA for that matter). Yes, you need numbers not to set off a red flag and to make it past initial cuts, but in the end, schools are more interested in you — your research interests, your ability to think critically, what others think of your ability to think critically and succeed in graduate school. The numbers are just there as an initial check. Be strategic about your letter writers. I came from a small LAC, so no “big” names in the sense of research and Academia (with a capital ‘A’), but I did have letter writers that were more than willing to go to bat for me, one of whom was an alumna of one of the schools to which I applied. Give yourself and them (!) plenty of time to tailor letters to each school if they so desire, and don’t stress if the deadline is approaching and they haven’t yet submitted. Gently nudge, but don’t freak out. They do get done. For your SOP, write long versions and short versions. I started with a long version directed at my top choice school, and then tailored that to my other applications followed by creating a shorter version for when needed. Applications are expensive. Options are good, but I do not think you should feel the need to apply to 10+ schools, especially if some are not especially great fits. I know that there are one or two schools to which I probably should not have bothered applying, but I did anyways and spent the money to do so. Be mindful of cost to apply when selecting your schools. Rejections are not personal. Remember that you are competing with hundreds of other applicants, all of whom have similar backgrounds and aspirations. There is some luck and timing involved in getting acceptances. Don’t be afraid to have contingency plans. Be optimistic about your chances of admission, but also be practical and be ready to move on and have other things to do and places to go. There’s always next cycle. SOP: PM — if you’re actually interested. I actually emphasized my interest in theory and how it influences my approach to international relations.
Additional Comments: I also recommend that you take a look at the previous cycle of this same type of results threads (see the OP), as well as this great post by @VMcJ about what was done differently this cycle opposed to last cycle. Keep in mind, however, that these exist just to give you an idea of what a small number of good profiles look like. Not everybody excepted looks like a 4.0 GPA and 170/170/6.0 GRE with an ivy background and publications.

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Mid-tier private liberal arts university
Major(s)/Minor(s): International relations and cultural anthropology; certificate in international studies
Undergrad GPA: 4.0, Magna cum laude, honors in both departments
Type of Grad: N/A but did take two graduate-level courses during UG
Grad GPA: 4.0
GRE: 162V | 155Q | 5.5AW
Any Special Courses: qualitative methods; research methods in political science; self-designed independent reading course
Letters of Recommendation: mixture of UG tenure-track professors (always 2 IR [1 tenured] and 1 anthro)
Research Experience: undergraduate thesis (for anthropology), all qualitative
Teaching Experience: N/A
Subfield/Research Interests: IR but interests intersect subfields | critical security; discourse; terrorism
Other: The writing sample I submitted was the introduction to my senior thesis for anthropology
RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Ohio State University (TBD), University of Maryland ($$)
Waitlists: Syracuse
Rejections: Washington University, Yale, Johns Hopkins
Pending: Georgetown (likely rejection)
Going to: Still pending, but fairly sure I know where I'll be going [and will update here once I've made the official decision]
LESSONS LEARNED: I only had three months to research and select schools, as well as put together and submit my applications by the time I decided that I was going to apply to graduate school. I had to submit everything two months before the deadlines because of an opportunity that arose that I could not turn down, which would put me outside the country and without reliable internet access (and at times, access to the application websites even when internet was available). In the end, however, I think this likely helped me from over-thinking my applications. I had to be on point and confident in what I submitted. (I am not immune to the freak-out, however; once results started rolling in, I joined the pack of panicked applicants.)
Overall, I cannot emphasize enough what previous cycles have demonstrated: fit matters. I emphasized my interdisciplinarity and my background in anthropology and political science, which likely helped and hindered me at different schools. I excelled in both of my departments in undergraduate, but I approached political science from an anthropological lens (and focused my anthropology studies on political anthropology); I sought to demonstrate the benefits of this interdisciplinary background. I also focused on my training and interest in critical theory, even while knowing the spaces and opportunities to study and practice such in the U.S. are few and far between. I know that my less common background and my research interests helped me stand out at my top choice school to which I was admitted and will be attending. Overall, I think my strong letters of recommendation are what helped me compensate for “lower” GRE scores and my undergraduate background from a small LAC lacking in reputation. That being said, I think I could have applied to some different programs that may have been better fits than the D.C.-area schools, but hindsight is 20/20.
My general advice, in no particular order:
Start studying for the GRE early and don’t neglect verbal because you think you’re strong there or vice versa for quantitative. Invest in prep books (and maybe find friends that are also studying and split the cost); they do help, at least as refreshers.  Don’t panic over your GRE scores (or GPA for that matter). Yes, you need numbers not to set off a red flag and to make it past initial cuts, but in the end, schools are more interested in you — your research interests, your ability to think critically, what others think of your ability to think critically and succeed in graduate school. The numbers are just there as an initial check. Be strategic about your letter writers. I came from a small LAC, so no “big” names in the sense of research and Academia (with a capital ‘A’), but I did have letter writers that were more than willing to go to bat for me, one of whom was an alumna of one of the schools to which I applied. Give yourself and them (!) plenty of time to tailor letters to each school if they so desire, and don’t stress if the deadline is approaching and they haven’t yet submitted. Gently nudge, but don’t freak out. They do get done. For your SOP, write long versions and short versions. I started with a long version directed at my top choice school, and then tailored that to my other applications followed by creating a shorter version for when needed. Applications are expensive. Options are good, but I do not think you should feel the need to apply to 10+ schools, especially if some are not especially great fits. I know that there are one or two schools to which I probably should not have bothered applying, but I did anyways and spent the money to do so. Be mindful of cost to apply when selecting your schools. Rejections are not personal. Remember that you are competing with hundreds of other applicants, all of whom have similar backgrounds and aspirations. There is some luck and timing involved in getting acceptances. Don’t be afraid to have contingency plans. Be optimistic about your chances of admission, but also be practical and be ready to move on and have other things to do and places to go. There’s always next cycle. SOP: PM — if you’re actually interested. I actually emphasized my interest in theory and how it influences my approach to international relations.
Additional Comments: I also recommend that you take a look at the previous cycle of this same type of results threads (see the OP), as well as this great post by @VMcJ about what was done differently this cycle opposed to last cycle. Keep in mind, however, that these exist just to give you an idea of what a small number of good profiles look like. Not everybody excepted looks like a 4.0 GPA and 170/170/6.0 GRE with an ivy background and publications.