MrsPhD

You can ask current students. When I was in grad school, the DGS had sent us an email asking how much we spent on rent (and whether they shared, where they lived), to create some cost estimates for accepted students. (I was not in DC. What I'm saying it's better to just ask SEVERAL students there and it's a common question.)

Try waybackmachine https://archive.org/web/

Having two supervisors can potentially give you 2 good letters of recommendation here, while having one will give you just one letter. However, the personality and interest of the professors also plays a part there, so it depends on who they are and you can try to schedule a short conversation with them or write them an email or talk to their former/current students about their experience. Talk to current students and try to figure out where the graduates of each program ended up. Also, even though you have scholarships, really check how much it costs to live in both cities and what's included. Both are really expensive.

Look at professors that will teach the classes you are teaching at both programs and also those you could work with on a thesis. Those are the ones who will write letters of recommendation for you. That's what matters. Do they publish? Do they have any connections to US Institutions? Also, do they offer any methods classes? You have no quant knowledge at all (from bachelor) so at least you need an intro class to quantitative methods.

You could look into getting experience on survey research. Many of those positions are remote. For psych, you'll be doing surveys, working with surveys, and doing survey experiments, so hands-on experience on survey research would be good. By this I mean, YouGov, NORC, or any company/agency running surveys. You can also look for one year research positions for people wanting to do PhDs. I know MIT had one. There are several around if you sign up for the polmeth list serv, they usually get posted there. Those would start August 2022, so you would not have a problem with your lease; you'll need something for the time in between.

You mean to accept a department? You should look at potential mentors/advisors and look at the placement of their students (students who directly worked with those people). You should also look at the placement of the department but focus on the placement for those in your field. Some departments place better in one field and then place nobody in another field. You should also take into consideration the % that got a job. Many department post the 2 people that got TT jobs but that's different if their cohort is 4 people versus 20 people. Then there are other stuff to consider, like mentoring style of potential advisors; do faculty coauthor with students?; will funding be enough?; do they make you be TA a lot or do they have time in which you don't have to TA/RA and only study?

There are different ways in which admissions work. In some cases, there is a committee that makes all of the decisions. Sometimes they ask for feedback, on the final list, but that's it. That seems to be the case here, or she said that to be polite.

I don't think the GPA is a problem. Grades in the US are inflated. Grades in other countries work differently and I've seen many places that, if grading is from 1 to 10, nobody gets a 10 or even a 9 at times. If you think this is the case, your professors for the Masters should be writing that you were in the 1% of the class or the 5% or 10% of all the students they've had... things like that. They can also explain things for their own class like, so and so got X in my class and although it could seem low by US standards, it was in the top X% of the class. Your GPA from undergrad shows that as well. You got some awards and your GPA is not good *by US standard*. But again, US grades are way overinflated. Don't put your GPA on your resume. I think you have good chances with the information provided. I'd check programs that are more quant focused. Your skills are a plus.

Several people here, including me, have said a lot of times that GRE score is not a good predictor of success in graduate school and there is not a strong causal link and yet, you keep saying that there is a correlation. You also say that WE should provide citations. You can make a simple google scholar search. Why don't YOU provide a literature review on your case, though? Your counter-argument is that we should provide the evidence rather than you? You are the type of person that just wants to be right for the sake of being right. I can already tell you that this is a bad attitude, particularly for graduate school. The discipline is moving to co-authorship and if you are like this, you are going to alienate all of the other graduate students, who are your pool of coauthors. Have you even been in committee for deciding grad applications? Because I have.

Some of the math questions have examples about baseball or stuff like that. That is just a small example of how it's problematic. This is wrong. There's a a lot of empirical research on how GRE does not correlate with success or ability.

I'd start by looking into scholarships for European universities. Doing a masters first would serve you well and Europe has a much longer tradition for these interests, particularly in the UK and France. It's usually called History of Ideas or political ideas. Your interests seem to be in Europe. I don't think that applying to a political science PhD right now would be a good idea. You wouldn't be able to take classes that give you the background you need. After doing a Masters you'll have a clearer idea of what you want to focus on and you'd have the background. If you don't want to do the Masters route and just want to do the US PhD one, then I'd recommend looking into history and if there's one that has a tradition of political history for the specific period you are interested in and if it has professors studying labor.

What do you want to do as a subfield? If you can connect your experience and skills to what you want to do, then maybe you can build a good portfolio. What I'm seeing is that your undergrad was 10 years ago, your graduate program is not relevant for the PhD, and you don't have research experience. The positives are that your writing is should be great, and that's something you can emphasize.

If you are not from the US (you say India), you need to apply to more private universities. UC Irvine typically does not fund foreign students because they are much more expensive than US students. Public universities charge more for tuition to foreigners, which means that if a program gives you a scholarship, you are much more expensive than an American. I don't imagine University of Cincinnati, Kansas University, have good funding. It's difficult to say anything about admissions because what matters is fit and research interests. You also have no research experience which makes your profile kind of weak. I'd recommend looking for scholarships to pursue masters and then apply to PhD. You can look into any scholarship that gives you the opportunity of doing a Masters in Europe or the US or Canada.

Are you interested in a region in particular? I think you are missing some strong programs in CP that you could apply that are higher than UT Austin/Northwestern but a bit lower than Harvard. Don't get me wrong, apply to Harvard/Yale/Stanford, but there is a LOT between those and UT Austin. Stonybrook is great in Behavior, but do they have someone in comparative?

You cannot transfer. You have to apply to other programs and start as a first year student again. It's perfectly doable and several people do it. 1. You might be able to get a good recommendation letter from someone there. I'd try to have at least one from this program. 2. Work on explaining what you want to do in terms of research and improve your materials. You'll need a very good cover letter and research statement. Avoid the sad stories and anecdotes about your life if you put any. I don't know why people put those. If you are reapplying and move to a better fit/better program, then you need to show that you got some skills/did something/did well. 3. On your advisor, it's also a pandemic, so someone not being not available right now it's hard to gauge. I'd recommend getting in touch with other students this advisor has currently. Talk to them. If there is someone who graduated recently, talk to them as well.

You could say in your SOP that your performance in class has improved over time. But with the GRE scores and the research experience, nobody will care about the GPA because being good at taking exams is not an important skill. So I'd focus on the other skills you developed. I'd say to apply high. About the letters, tenure-track professors are fine, but make sure they are advanced tenure-track. The best letters are those comparing candidates to former students and other PhD applicants, and it will be difficult for them to do that if they have graduated 3 years ago. If you are going to go with someone very junior (as I said, < 3 years from graduation), it has to be because they are going to put a lot of time in writing your letter and they have much to write about you. If they write you a very short letter and they also cannot compare you to former students, that is kind of a through away. So I'd suggest that you think about this strategically and see if there is a more senior person that knows you who could write you a letter. I would apply to top schools and some safer schools. And because the topic you are interested in is very specific (and not many people work on it) I would look at schools that are good at conflict and have gender scholars (not necessarily working on conflict) to have more places to apply to. You also need to think if you are more interested in CP or IR. Some conflict scholars are in IR and some are in CP, and I've known people who wanted to do CP and ended having to take IR classes because the key advisor was in IR. This issue can vary depending on how departments are organized and I bring it up because your topics are more CP than IR.

I agree with above about waiting for the following cycle. Focus should be on: - Finishing thesis and making you advisor happy with your work so that he/she can write you a glowing letter. - Awards for the thesis are not necessary. But keep an eye open for fellowships/scholarships opportunities. For instance, they have a summer fellowship you might be able to apply for https://dssg.uchicago.edu/ You can also try to participate in hackathons in your college or close by for some experience and trying to seem active. - I'd start by asking professors at your college for RA opportunities, particularly the ones you'd want a letter from. If not, do they have TAs? The letters do not need to be from political science. Just try to get the best letters. If that does not work, you can ask your advisor if he has any colleagues you could RA for to gain more experience. Maybe he knows people at universities you could eventually apply to. And I know some universities have summer research opportunities (or something called like that) where they assign you to a professor. You might be able to do that the following summer and get a letter from that. - I think that MPSA has panels for undergraduates (April in Chicago). You might want to try to present your thesis there. It would be good experience if you can get some money to attend (maybe your college has scholarships and MPSA might have something, I wouldn't try to pay for everything on your own). It could also give you an excuse to e-mail maybe 2 people whose work you really like and from universities you have a good chance of getting in (not top 10) to ask them if they can meet with you (and give the excuse you are there to present your thesis at such and such panel). The people should do work related to your thesis.

I think that if someone writes on your letter that you are interested in methods or if you signal that in your SOP, that would be good. A signal that you are eager to learn and will put the effort/time would be enough (if the rest of the package is relatively strong). Maybe you have already selected the classes for the last year, but if you haven't, maybe there is room to take another statistics or data science class (preferable applied to social science). That would be another way to signal interest without having to take a very heavy linear algebra class or something of that sort. If you take the class in the Spring you can have one of your letter writers mention that along with your interest in working on your skills/tools. And I agree with others who have recommended that you take the GRE again.

I would not say you are working through those books in your SoP. You are doing that on your own so it would not be useful information. Getting something publishable now seems too late. It is better to ask those people that are going to write you "passable" letters if you can RA for them in the summer (now). Tell them you can work for free, because you would like more experience. If you don't tell them you can work for free they might decline. Also, are those people teaching a class you could take in the fall? If they are not teaching undergrad and they are teaching a grad seminar that is relevant for you, try to get in that. Will your thesis be your writing sample? A lot of departments are asking for writing samples.

I think you need to improve your work and think carefully about the feedback being given to you. You have to figure out what to do with it. For PhD admissions you need letters of recommendation and if that advisor were to write you a letter, well, I wouldn't think it would be a good one. Also, one of the first things you will have to work on in the PhD is literature reviews and you will have to do readings for class and engage in discussion. It seems that, based on what you say, you wouldn't be able to do any of that. Nobody is born knowing how to do stuff. Most of the work is sitting down for hours and putting the time and effort. You have to figure out how to do it more efficiently and improve.

The best thing is start contacting letter writers early and try to get people that know you best to write your letters. The worst are letters of people that do not know the applicant enough.

You might want to e-mail the DGS and ask if there are any professors who might need an RA during the summer. Someone could pay you to work remotely on a project. Usually, they pay by the hour.

Here are my 2 cents: - Berkeley has huge cohorts and a lot of people get lost (end up not finding a job, takes for ever to write dissertation, competition for professors' time, etc.) - Yale has a combination of the methods approach you like (students typically do fieldwork, some people do experiments, others do stats, or formal models). They have good people for CP, CPE; not sure about IPE. - Duke has very good stats training. They have some people for CP, CPE. Students interested in formal models typically get the MA in Econ. The best person for IPE just retired (Michael Ward). - UCSD has a combination of methods too. They have GPS so that could increase the number of classes or advisors for you in CP/CPE/IPE. - Columbia does not have as many faculty as the rest. Some are too junior (assistants) so they cannot really advise you or chair your dissertation. The only one would be Humphreys but for what you said there is not enough overlap with your research. You have too many choices. You need to start declining some offers and leaving the ones you are really interested in. You only have 4 days and you have not declined any department yet!!! I think that just start declining and that will force you to leave only the ones you like. Look at professors and what they are working on: Do you like what they published? Is that what you want to do? Where are their students now? Did you talk to any of them? What did they say? You don't have much time to find out stuff.

If you want to take the "non math" intro course, then maybe you need to take some math classes. If you haven't taken any math classes, then you don't have a shot at top 15 departments (with a few exceptions).

Math dept are something too theoretical. Before going to another department you should ask around. You can also try sociology or psychology. You should definitely take some type of OLS and of MLE (logit, poisson). You might not have time to take more classes. If you do, ask around for classes that are more practical or that have a good balance of theory and practice. If there is a class on programming applied to social science problems, that could be handy too (if it uses R, for instance), since that could help you to learn how to manage data efficiently or scrape data, etc; it is a good skill to have if you want to start working as an RA for professors in the PhD program (I could definitely use one of those!)