RolyPolyGoalie

Looks like the US News site updated with the 2017 rankings a little early: https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/political-science-rankings?int=abc409.

PROFILE: Undergrad: Top 20 Private R1 Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science & Philosophy/Interdisciplinary Minors Undergrad GPA: 3.98 (converted to 4.0) Type of Grad: N/A Grad GPA: N/A GRE: 170/161/5.0 Any Special Courses: None Letters of Rec: 3 polisci research advisors Research Experience: 3 years of RA/research fellowship positions during undergrad within field of interest (some university awards), 1 year in contract/research work in DC area following graduation. Teaching Experience: None Subfield/Research Interests: Subnational/Local politics, with particular interest in ideological geographies and party politics Other: Some abroad experience RESULTS: Acceptances: UNC-CH ($$), UCLA ($$) Waitlists: None Rejections: Harvard (assumed), Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, Michigan, Duke, UCSD, MIT, Yale, UMinn-TC Pending: None Going to: UCLA (pending visit) Lessons Learned: 1. Applied to way too many schools, which meant (a) lots of sadness come February, (b) lots of application fees, and (c) not enough focus on fit for each application. Fit ended up being everything; both of the schools I was accepted to have a lot of faculty focusing on subnational politics. I was trying to make room within some departments where there clearly wasn't. Not saying by any means that having a different interest would have gotten me into those programs, though, just that it limited the number of potential "ins" I had with any given school. In the end, happy to end up at a program with deep support for my field of choice. 2. Could have spent a lot more time prepping for GRE. I was always confident in V, but Q was more difficult. 161 isn't awful by any means, but may have given pause at the top tiers. If I had taken it earlier and stressed myself out less, I might have been more inclined to retake with a focus on Q. However, since I was so exasperated after the first go-round, I committed to my scores without a second thought. 3. Unclear whether my time away from school helped or hurt. Job is outside of my field of interest, but delaying the application cycle for one year allowed me to include some conference presentations, awards, and experience on the application. So while the job may have not been worth it, the resume building certainly was. SOP: PM if interested, but followed same basic structure as given above.

I'm a Seattle native who spent all 4 years of undergrad in Houston, and I genuinely love both cities. This is pretty much true, which sorta answers AuntieGrandma's concerns. We're pretty protective of our little enclave, which sorta manifests itself in coldness toward tourists. Once you begin to understand and live within the culture, though, you'll make some great relationships with people. Houston is a little more open from the start (maybe it's that southern hospitality thing) and more culturally diverse, though it has less of a concentrated "urban" feel because of the sprawl. Weather is probably the biggest difference... Houston is incredibly humid and wasn't livable until AC came to town. Winters don't really get below 40. Seattle rain is a little overhyped but definitely there as a constant drizzle from fall to late spring, but the summers are perfect. If you're outdoorsy, Seattle is the better option, since you have to drive about 2 hours just to get beyond the city limits in Houston. Pricewise, Houston is the cheapest big city in the US, while Seattle is rapidly rising in prices. There are a lot of amenities and lifestyle perks that come with that price, but some people find the adjustment difficult. Overall, both cities are great, have amazing people, amazing food, and enough stuff to do to keep you occupied for a lifetime. Neither should really be a dealbreaker in terms of your choice.