ArcierePrudente

Last night I dreamed I was admitted to Northwestern and I didn't even apply to Northwestern. From this I draw two conclusions: Too many of you applied to Northwestern; and I spend way too much time on GradCafe.

I honestly read more into the emails I receive from grad admissions departments than I ever have into any romantic relationship. With that said, about a week ago, one of my programs sent me an email notifying me of a foreign language fellowship whose applications were due 1-2 weeks after the department's historical 'unofficial' notification dates. It did sound generic, and the email was careful to specify that the fellowship program office didn't have any information on the status of anyone's PhD application. Part of me feels like it would be silly to send out a mass email and potentially receive a flood of irrelevant fellowship applications (from non-admits). But most of me is too wary of getting my hopes up and wants to write it off as a generic email blast that will weed out non-admits retroactively.

I'd expect Chicago to do so.

Double rainbow...

Historically, CST tends to notify people in mid-February. You can check the results search for more in-depth data: http://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/ Best of luck!

Chemical peel

So I'm a political/social sciences applicant who applied to late-notification schools (if past and present Results searches are any indication). At least one is supposed to start notifying admits this coming week—with no news generally meaning bad news. Has anyone else been really nervous about checking their email on the days when admissions decisions are supposed to get sent out? If so, what did you do/what are your plans for checking? Did you/will you wait until the end of the day, do it around friends (and/or alcohol), wait for complete privacy (and/or more alcohol)? I'm at a loss over here. Obviously this isn't the kind of thing that can be put off, but... oy.

@deutsch1997bw, first of all, sorry about Wisconsin--that's always a bummer--but second, I agree that acceptances/rejections can be quite random, to the point where I wouldn't even blame your quant GRE. For a lot of institutions faculty 'fit' rules the day, but even then, I once heard about a very competitive student who was rejected from a program he expected would have taken him easily. When he subsequently bumped into his former POI at a conference, he asked what had gone wrong. The POI responded, "Arendt fatigue" (he'd submitted a writing sample on Arendt). So really, among the most competitive pool of 'finalists', it's the littlest things that count against you.

Usually the writing sample is meant to showcase your highest-quality academic work. It should be complete in that the sample should contain its own coherent, original argument(s), but if those arguments are smaller excerpts from a larger piece, that's perfectly acceptable. I think almost everyone I know, myself included, used excerpts from their thesis as a writing sample.

In terms of specificity, I began by listing my research interests very broadly and conceptually, and from there listed a few discrete but related projects that I would be interested in pursuing vis-à-vis those interests. I explained how my prior work would support these projects (or how it had influenced them), and described what my research methods might entail going forward (and with whom, etc). If ever I felt I was getting too specific or definite in terms of desired projects, I changed phrases like 'I plan to explore' with 'I am interested in exploring,' or 'I will demonstrate' with 'I might discuss'. Of course you don't want to get too equivocal either, but my SoP reeeeally wasn't running that risk.

+ 30 points. And by points, I mean fully-funded months of PhD study.

I can still never remember which 'eminent/immanent/imminent' I want to use on the first try. Once I have a free second to breathe I'll need to devise a mnemonic. Especially since I'm in... eimmainent critique. Biggest Application Blunders: 1. When writing the phrase "Machiavellian political thought," in one SoP (fortunately for a school that's much lower on the list) I accidentally missed a 't'. Evidently I am going to orient such-and-such with respect to "Machiavellian political though." 2. Not my fault, but because of a system glitch, one of my M.A. courses showed as 'Incomplete' on my transcript. After several frantic calls to the University Registrar's office, I ended up having to attach an explanatory letter to all my applications with the Registrar's phone number, my assurance that I'd gotten an 'A' in the class, and my subtle but clear indication that the 'incomplete' mark had nothing to do with me or my performance in the class. My transcript only just now got changed. (In hindsight I should have just gone full Donald Trump circa the Hawaiian Missile-Misleading Crisis... 'This was a registrar thing but I am now going to get involved with the transcript office. I love that they took responsibility. They took full responsibility.') 3. I applied to two PhD programs in the same department, and therefore had to open two applications on the same portal. If I had both application windows open at once, the server would automatically copy my responses for one application and paste them into the other application. Talk about terrifying. I hate robots.

I wouldn't rule out any options for you at this point -- you never know how these things go! That said, as I wrote above, referring me to MAPH was the best thing CST could have done for me at the time (MAPH is the Humanities equivalent of MAPSS, though I wound up mostly in MAPSS-oriented courses while at UofC and many just assumed I was in MAPSS and... I don't know... never came to discussions?). It made me a much stronger candidate this cycle, and my scholarship—and trust in it—benefitted exponentially. (I never would have believed that when I first got referred to MAPH either, by the way... I was crushed not to get into CST.) I'll cross my fingers for you to hear good things from any of the four—Poli-Sci, CST, MAPSS, MAPH!

Don't read too much into it. She likely gets upwards of several admissions-related emails a day and won't remember yours, even if she does play into your admissions decision (which is doubtful). I get that 'house of cards' feeling. One thing I read on here that helps me is that no one has the perfect application or conducted their application process 'perfectly' (whatever that even means). If one misstep or deviation were all it took, no one would ever get into grad school.

Thanks, all. @Comparativist I knowwww (exasperation directed towards myself, not you). Part of my reason for posting was that I'd started trying to convince myself that I wasn't even very competitive, and needed some sort of reality check. That said, I certainly don't expect anyone to have a crystal ball or know some sort of secret adcomm formula that I somehow missed.... I just needed/need perspective from people who were neither my worst critic (me) nor my most avid cheerleaders (parents/friends who don't really understand the PhD application process and mostly assume that if you're smart enough, you'll get in wherever you want). @StrengthandHonorThanks. And hey, I'd seriously love to hear more about your research. DM if you'd like. @DreamersDay That's what I've been trying to tell myself. Fortunately I do have awesome letter writers, and got a lot of good feedback while writing/editing the SoP, so we'll see. My MA year at Chicago was the best/proudest year of my life (weird, I know), and perhaps the one in which I've consciously learned the most. I've tried to do everything possible to get myself back there for PhD work, and it's been really difficult accepting that the admission decision is now pretty much out of my hands. Also sucks that Poli-Sci and CST send out their admit letters about a week apart...

I am as well. You shouldn't be seen as dishonest or desperate. If anything, adcomms will see this as a sign that you're committed to their institution. One thing you may want to consider, though, is reaching out to a trusted professor/POI in one or both departments, or a current advisor who might be able to ensure your fair hearing on both committees. I was warned that occasionally, adcomms can be reviewing an application, see that a candidate is applying to two departments within the same school, and just 'assume' the other department will admit them without ever picking up the phone. To mitigate this, you may want to ask/talk to your advisor about how you can ask that both committees communicate with one another re: their decision on your application.

Your body lets you sleep? I envy you... I'm one of those people who can't be still when stressed (or, um, ever, maybe), and fortunately I get to stand/relocate around the office throughout the day. Physical activity helps a lot; preferably something taxing enough to render you unable to think beyond survival mode, during the worst of it. Anything martial arts related that requires skill as well as speed is helpful. I also bought myself an under-desk elliptical for Christmas and a treadmill computer 'shelf,' so maybe I'll take a page out of your playbook and watch YouTube while running.

@GreenEyedTrombonist I actually did all right by wearing a tight-ish, long-sleeved black top and thermals on the bottom. (Underneath several other layers, of course!) I'd expect, though, that you might find some good tank top thermals on Amazon. I'll have to check and see what company I got my thermals from when I got home (it wasn't Eddie Bauer; I only used them for coats, which are high-quality but pretty expensive when not on clearance!) The multiple pairs of gloves saved me, as did a real pair of durable snow boots.

One factor—especially a grade or test score—is very unlikely to kill your chances of admission. If the rest of your application is strong, people shouldn't care about something like that.

I did my undergrad in LA, and moving to Chicago for an MA was the transition of all transitions. Long-term, you're going to want two winter coats—one of which might be knee-length and the other one of which should go at least to your calves and make you look like you're headed to a casting call for the Michelin Man. Eddie Bauer has good deals—you can shop for them on clearance during the summer. Also: thermal underwear. Yes, really. Good thermal underwear. And layer your gloves. Most places in the Midwest are great at cranking up the heat inside buildings, so once you're indoors, you can pretty much wear whatever. That said, you'd be smart to layer: you can pack a skirt if you'd like, but depending on the temps you can tolerate, you might be far happier (and still look super cute) in a pair of business trousers. You can pair that with a good blouse and colorful jacket/blazer—maybe one with contrasting/patterned inner sleeves that you can roll up for some added spunk—and voilà! Good to go.

^ Agreed that most adcomms are only just starting to meet. You might get a sense of when students applying to your universities have heard in prior years by checking the 'results' forum and searching for your school/field. As a general rule, however, I'd defer all rationally-based panic until late February or early March. (I know I can't tell you to defer panic entirely.) I wouldn't email your POIs about application status. If you can think of a reason to reach out and re-affirm your interest in the program/their work (and haven't done so already), that's another thing. Alternatively, once you do hear from a school, you might ask a trusted advisor how to reach out to other POIs/admissions departments and inform them that Institution X has presented you with Offer Y, but different professors/fields have different perspectives on this. Some consider it tactical, while others find it pushy.

Yes, this is my first post, and yes, it's a desperate call for you all to evaluate my profile. In my defense, I lost my sanity long before I lost my shame, so I've been fighting this urge for a while. While I'm applying to a few schools, this evaluation pertains only to the University of Chicago (Political Science; Theory Subfield)*. I've been freaking out more and more over the past couple of weeks (as I know we all have), so I'd appreciate any insight you all could offer. *I'm also applying to Social Thought, but realize it's even more difficult to predict one's chances of admission to CST from data like this than it is for Poli-Sci. If you'd like to provide feedback on my CST viability, that would be awesome, but Poli-Sci admission is probably a bit easier to gauge. BA: Political Science at a Top-20 or 25 university, depending on year. Major GPA 3.95. MA: University of Chicago, graduated last June (so yes, several poli-sci faculty know me well). Partial scholarship. All A's with some A minuses. GRE: 167V/154Q/4.5 AWA (I underscore on standardized writing tests despite being a good writer). Awards/Conferences/Research/Misc: - Undergraduate, university-wide analytical essay award - Presented at an Oxford University conference immediately after undergrad - Half-tuition scholarship for a summer abroad program in Italy - M.A. thesis nominated for a department-wide thesis award (now in the final stages of review) - M.A. work/study job proofreading a (now-deceased) philosopher's lecture transcripts from their tenure at UofC - As an M.A., also proofread a paper for a senior faculty member's upcoming book project - Partial scholarship for a summer Latin intensive at UofC - Currently a writer for a political and corporate PR firm LoRs: All three from Chicago professors; 2 well-known in political science, one of whom advised my thesis and remains a POI for PhD study. We both write on the same subject and have a similar methodology. Writer 3 is a Classics professor whose class directly related to my field of interest and informed my thesis/ongoing work. Languages: Italian (fluent), French (conversational), Latin (reading), German (just beginning, but currently studying) Faculty Fit/Research Interests: Best recognized as a Machiavelli scholar. Lately I've also been trying to merge this with liberal/immanent critique. My methods tend to involve close readings and rhetorical analyses as a means of de-constructing and re-interpreting political/theoretical paradigms. I'm interested in how political thought/rhetoric informs political behavior, and vice versa. Recently, I've also gotten into political theology quite a bit—I use the term 'theology' broadly, and as distinct from religion. And yes, I write—fairly impartially, I like to think—on Strauss. For Poli-Sci, one of my target faculty (the one who advised my thesis/wrote one of my letters) would seem to be an excellent research fit going forward, but he's on leave this year so I doubt he'll be sitting on the adcomm directly. Another POI looks like an excellent fit as his work relates to my methodology, and to specific research topics that I'm newer to — but I've never taken a course from him and we haven't spoken much. He's also on leave next year, which I just found out today — so again, not sure what this means in terms of my chances. I mention other university faculty in my SoP with whom I've worked, and who would likely speak highly of me if contacted, but they aren't directly involved with the PoSc department. For CST, I have a similar issue: one POI was on leave last year, but I've communicated with him substantially (his was the article I mentioned editing above) and had several extended face-to-face meetings with him. He knows me and my work well. The application that eventually resulted in my MA admission was first directed to CST (they referred me to the MA), and this Professor emailed me during that review process to let me know how much he enjoyed reading my writing sample. A few months ago I told him how meaningful this had been, and he remarked that he didn't remember many applicants' writing samples, and that mine remained one of the few that he recalled. He also said that I came 'very close' to admission last time, BUT he also said that after reviewing my MA transcript, if he were going on my course selections alone he might consider me a better for Poli-Sci than CST. I don't imagine the fact that I'm applying to all other Poli-Sci or Government programs will help much. I address/explain this in my SoP somewhat, but am not sure how well. Another POI looks like a great peripheral/methodological fit, but I've never spoken with him directly. Another POI is a largely similar case, except I have had a couple of face-to-face conversations with him. No classes, although I sat in on one while visiting Chicago ages and ages ago. I mention this class, and how cool it was, in my SoP (NB: I'm pretty sure I found a different word for 'cool' in my SoP. Pretty sure). Biggest Concerns: Aside from the low Quant and AWA GREs, and the couple of A minuses from the MA, I don't see any giant red flags. What worries me more is that these are two incredibly competitive programs, and I'm vying for one of very few spots among a probable cohort of Fulbright scholars, GREniuses, scholars with a whole list of peer-reviewed publications, people who are fluent in a dozen languages, etc. My concerns are mostly of the 'good enough' variety. This has all gone on quite long enough. Many thanks for any input people would like to offer.