ltr317

I would like to clarify some more about the potential benefits. Even if you just communicate with POIs back and forth via email, rather than meeting face-to-face, you still get a better sense of them and they of you than merely submitting an application without any idea of their personality. If a POI doesn't respond to your email, then you may find that s/he has an abrasive and brusque personality as a mentor. It's far better to find out during the application cycle than when you're in a program, in which case you don't have to apply there. Once you're in a program, it's a give and take affair for at least four years. As far as popular programs with tons of applicants, do you think POIs will remember and signal you out as that annoying aspirant when there are dozens of others contacting them as well? As you stated, "professors receive a ton of email and thus all the prospective students' might come across as pesky," so you'll be a faceless annoyance along with all the other faceless annoyances. You can still apply to those programs, but you may want to place other programs higher with professors who are communicative and friendlier. Just my .02 cents.

Are you applying to PhD or Master's programs? I think it's more important to contact POIs for potential doctoral studies. I didn't contact anyone when I applied to my current MA program because I had no prior historical training and had no idea what I wanted to study. After being admitted my advisor told me to take a broad spectrum of courses to determine my interest and focus. Now that I'm applying to PhD programs it is essential to know whether or not POIs will be able to mentor and advise me. To this end I emailed at least two POIs in almost all the programs that I thought would be a good fit. Only two POIs failed to reply. I have met potential POIs at three programs so far, and they have all stated that they would be happy to take me as a student if accepted into the program. I found out at these meetings why the two POIs didn't respond, one was retiring and the other accepted a job someplace else. Since there remains at least two other professors at each program I could work with, it won't deter me from applying. Without contacting various faculty and meeting them I wouldn't have known this. What is your concern about contact? The worse outcome would be no reply. The benefits seem to outweigh the costs for me.

Your question is too broad. Do you know the specifics or history of the conference? Do you know the number of presenters they will select? In terms of rate, if you know the number then you can calculate the percentage--e.g. 40 presenters out of 400 equals 10 percent. But knowing the rate doesn't mean you would be one of the 40 chosen.

gsc hit it right on the head. I attended a PhD admissions panel a few months ago, and asked if I should mention in the SOP that my main purpose after a doctorate was to publish. Everyone on the panel (they teach at different universities) advised against it since it would affect my chances of admission. Post-doc plans is a sensitive subject to discuss before you're in a PhD program.

Your'e not alone, we are all freaking out during the application cycle. Comes with the territory. Take long and slow breaths through your nose until air fills your lungs, then slowly exhale through your mouth, relaxing your facial muscles at the same time. Rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat. Do this several times a day. You will start to feel better and think clearer for a while until the next anxiety phase comes back. Rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat.

In general, doctorate programs in Education are not as competitive as programs in Graduate Arts and Sciences for example. Specifically, I can't speak about Stanford, but your undergrad GPA will not preclude you from consideration with TC. The adcom will see that you are able to do grad work with your MA.

I agree with what other responders have stated. Furthermore, adcoms will see that you graduated from an Ivy institution, where the competition for grades is fierce. I learned this the hard way when I was an undergrad at an Ivy, having decided to enjoy my journey into adulthood rather than hitting the books.

I've only been a member for a few months, but have found this place very helpful as I navigate through the PhD application process. As others have stated, I really like the spirit of the community here, where the advice is generally direct and well-meaning. Members do provide support and guidance that are beneficial to nervous applicants. Having earned an MPA earlier in my life, I found that I could offer advice to those who haven't entered into graduate school yet, while receiving advice on doctoral studies. Moreover, I believe in give and take. So I plan to continue coming back here even if I'm admitted and finished with PhD to help others.

Your knowledge of these composite schools are far more extensive than mine. I only know about New York City MPA, MPP or MS in PP programs; mainly because that was my focus back when I was looking for a professional program to land a job in either city government, non-profit, or higher ed admin. I only applied to SIPA, NYU Wagner and the New School for that reason.

I can't comment on IA programs, but for SIPA you should separate the two components of the school. I graduated SIPA with an MPA, and the curriculum was very different from that of IA--like you did for HKS.

Carly Rae - You posted in the History forum. Look one below in languages.

I assume you mean professors, not entire programs, who specialize on the English Reformation. At Fordham, besides Hornbeck in the Theology department, there's Susan Wabuda in the History department.

ROFLMAO

The first goal doesn't necessarily lead to the other; just because it doesn't pan out. You need to demonstrate a high capacity to be a top level administrator. How are you going to gain administrative experience while you are teaching? From my experience with past and present professors who became administrators, all had or have extensive teaching experience. It took a while for them to move up, and all were well into middle age before that happened. It is a rarity for anyone under forty to even be in such a position; unless one earned a professional degree like an EdD. If your ultimate goal is to earn a PhD, then a "MA is a possibility" is wrongheaded. It should be an absolute necessity given you have no background in political science. Since you want a success story about getting into a PhD program from a completely different field, I'll offer a partial one for now: me. My undergraduate major was in experimental psychology. I had a career in budget management, but finally decided to go back to the academy because I developed a strong interest in history a few years ago. I knew that reading history books for the general public was not the same as reading academic monographs or journal articles. Given my lack of prior historical knowledge and methodology, I had to build my credentials just to get accepted into a master's program. So I audited two advanced undergrad history classes, but more importantly I requested to the professors that I would be completing the course requirements and to treat me as if I was taking it for a grade. They happily complied to my wishes, and both wrote outstanding LORs that helped get me into a master's program. I am now almost done and hope to finish my master's thesis by the end of next semester, but by early summer at the latest. Almost all of my professors in my master's program have encouraged me to apply to PhD programs for next fall. I know the deck is stacked against me, because of my non-traditional, older status, but I am going to give it my best shot because I find academic research and writing fits my character. If I do get into a PhD program, then it will be a success story. I agree with ExponentialDecay's and Neo_Institutionalist's advice that you need to learn some basic political science concepts before you even apply. Then apply to political science MA programs to get a good grounding because your naivete is obvious. I say this because you posted in the government affairs sub-forum that you're applying to MPP/MPA programs. Those are professional programs, much different than political science: practice vis-a-vis theory. I have an MPA, which is why I worked in budget management. I'm not sure how interested you are in political science if you're applying to a very different program. Maybe you should just sit back and think for a year or two, and get some focus. That's my .02 cents.

I'm confused why you want to pursue a PhD only in poly sci. It makes sense if you want to teach poly sci at the college/university level, but if your goal is to work in college administration then a doctorate in any field is acceptable. A EdD in college admin is preferable since it usually takes less time to complete than a PhD and you don't need to transition from teaching to admin. But if your primary goal is to teach poly sci, then your lack of prior coursework is problematic. I would recommend that you apply for an MA first at a public in-state college/university which will be much cheaper than a private institution and will provide the poly sci training you need before you apply for a PhD.

I want to add that Columbia has two options: a sequential MA leading to the PhD and a free-standing MA. The sequential option is not a stand alone degree, one must be accepted into the PhD program and is awarded the MA after the required coursework. The doctoral English program is as competitive as Harvard's, admitting fewer than 5% of applicants in any given year. The free-standing MA is strictly a pay for play program, offering no financial aid. The admittance rate is slightly higher--approx. 15% admit rate--but after completion there's no guarantee that one will be accepted into the doctoral program. In fact, on the department website it states that zero or one MA graduate from the free-standing program is the norm, which make the odds about the same or even higher than applying straight to the PhD program. They also state, however, that several MA graduates are accepted to PhD programs elsewhere. From personal experience, the wife of a friend graduated from the free-standing MA: had perfect grades, received outstanding LORs from her Columbia English professors, wrote a killer SOP, and was still rejected to the PhD program. She was accepted to several other programs, including NYU, but decided to resume her career in publishing. Just a caveat that it is no walk in the park. Being admitted to PhD programs in the humanities and social sciences are becoming harder because of smaller cohorts and less funding, but that doesn't mean one shouldn't try if that's the ultimate life goal. One should apply, however, to several programs ranging from very competitive to competitive to give one a chance of being accepted somewhere--assuming of course the program's fit.

You are not doing anything wrong. I met with the History Graduate Director today because I am interested in applying to the department's PhD program , and was told there are some technical problems with the application process regarding the GSAS. She mentioned the university is working to resolve the issues, and hopefully will have it running in early October. Check back in two weeks, and if it's not working properly call the GSAS.

Not necessarily. You should know both, in the event you apply to programs that either prefer one method over the other. But even if you apply to only programs that focus on the temporal and region, you still need to know more than one area for your comps.

For MA programs you should also be concentrating in a secondary and maybe even, tertiary field. Several PhD programs have and others are beginning to emphasize global themes as a preferred pedagogical method. You will be a more attractive candidate when the time comes if your MA training is not too narrowly focused.

In that case, the best of luck! Make yourself and your family proud.

I'm glad you had the support and came out of if fine. I haven't reached that point yet and hope I don't. I've been handling the stress fairly well up to now, but do get frustrated from time to time. I'm familiar with my grad school's counseling center, but thanks for the reminder in case I need their help. You do a service to everyone in MA and PhD programs who might need counseling but who may not know or are afraid to ask about this valuable support program.

Vanity should not be a factor; it should not even be in the equation. One can be proud of earning a PhD because it is a difficult endeavor, but not because it's for bragging rights. None of my history professors flaunt their PhD as some sort of elitist attainment. Love of learning history should be the prime consideration in pursuit of a PhD. You should be aware that the current college job market for a history PhD is pretty dismal, and if one wants employment in government, a history degree should be fairly relevant to the desired position. I have an MPA and worked in various government and non-profit positions because the degree is considered more flexible. So, I caution you to think more deeply why you want a PhD, and if that's your final determination, then go for it. It's not a bed of roses though.

OHSP - Thanks for the encouragement. Right now I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel, but I will slog along until I do. At that point, I can rejoice and offer encouragement to the next round of applicants!

From what I understand in his posting, he is currently finishing undergrad and would like to continue with an online MA because there is no nearby in-person program. It seems he wants to teach high school with the MA after military service? You're right, he can skip the MA and apply for a PhD instead once he has served his duty. What I'm confused about is why he mentioned the PhD when his goal is to teach high school?

He stated he has to serve his military commitment first.