Theory007

No Phd program will admit students at this point except, maybe, if too many people have changed their minds about attending somewhere. It is possible though that some MA programs are open for applications at this time.

Hi Celine! It's true I think that for some graduate degrees in the US people tend to have work experience. It's not possible for example to do an MBA without a couple of years at least, but I don't think this applies to MA programs in political science. In many European countries it is very common for people to obtain graduate degrees, but in the US it is not. My guess is that people probably are older when they takes MAs in the US, but it really should not hold you back. I'd just make sure to check the admission requirements for each program although it would surprise me if they had age requirements. Some may require work experience but age per se is not much of a factor. Note also that many US based MA programs are unfunded and therefore expensive compared to European ones. Hope this helps Celina. In short; you're not too young for MA programs in the US. Good luck!

No problem. Why not spend your time doing really well on the GREs or yes, see if you can publish a paper (of any kind) somewhere? I think that would offset not having a math background. I do think that classes at a community college would be better on balance, but I am unsure how much it would actually help, i.e. I have no idea if it would be useful. My hunch is that improving other aspects of your application would be better. And I would also write a personal statement that emphasizes the qualitative nature of your academic interests (if this is accurate) and identify POIs who would be able to supervise projects of that kind. Another suggestion is to go for an MA degree somewhere. There are not many really good options, but completing one would benefit you I think since you graduated from college quite long ago and due to the limited quantitative background, which is something an MA program would allow you to brush up on.

There will be exceptions of course, but I am almost sure that no top-25 (or so) program accepts non-theory students without a substantial quantitative background. The competition is simply too stiff so except if you are truly outstanding in other areas of your application, such as near-perfect GRE scores, I predict you'll have a hard time in really competitive programs.

I largely agree with the post above but I am more pessimistic that non-college online math courses will be useful. Maybe you will be able to signal that you find the quantitative aspect of your education to be important, but you are unable to signal, I think, that you have competency in this stuff. Depending on where you apply this may not be strictly necessary; if I was you I would apply only to non-quantitative programs in the second half of the top-50. I do think that all programs have quantitative requirements nowadays, but you may be able to find POIs who are not as quantitatively motivated. And yes, you will have to work on all other aspects of your application and do well on the GREs. I think in your case having a high quantitative GRE score (and verbal as well) may be particularly important. Hope that helps - good luck!

Duke is a top-10 program (ranked #10), but the academic job market is really tough these days so I doubt that the placement is great in any program. Even if you are coming from a top program in the UK I'd encourage you to apply broadly. Top programs in the US are notoriously competitive and even great students like yourself have only a slim chance of getting in. I would advise that you apply to 6-10 programs where your fit would be good (fit is the most important thing) and then spend the next 6 months perfecting every aspect of your application including the GREs. Good luck!

I'd look at UCLA and Johns Hopkins for as they are probably the centers of continental thought in the US. But lots of programs will have some theory professors who do continental thought and would be able to supervise what you are interested in. I'd look at the theory faculty in all programs in the top-50 ish and see where you'd be a good fit. Applications are tough and many qualified applicants do not get in anywhere so I'd encourage you to apply broadly.

I stand by what I said in this post earlier on a closely related topic. In short, you should stay with the original offer because that program has turned applicants down because you had signed a contract verifying that you'd be studying there.

Thanks everyone for another season on this forum! I'm proud to be associated with you all (even if we're anonymous) and grateful that we are such a good community! The main application thread had, as you can see, well above 500k views since November, which is really quite mind-blowing to me. To those of you who will be reapply next year, I'll be back then and look forward to reconnect. I'll sign in from time to time and please feel free to reach out if there is anything I can do, help with, or give you advise on. I certainly do not know everything but I do know some things and would be happy to help. Best wishes to you all!

Yes! It's not absolutely certain that you will, but I'd reach out tomorrow if you did not.

First of all: it freaking sucks coming to a program with a dream of getting outstanding political science training and then get disappointed. I'm sorry you are going through this. It's painful and difficult and you should do your best (as you are) to get out of there asap. But I agree that you cannot transfer. But some programs, also good ones, accept a ton of transfer credits. So you can go to a new program as a new student but skip out on 2-4 semesters of coursework. Also if you were to start over, it's not the end of the world. Many students join new programs and have to do or redo coursework. I would also consider using my original recommenders and not rely on the new ones. If you want to leave a program and you ask current professors for recommendations you risk not getting in anywhere. If you then choose to stay in the current program it would be no surprise to me if you'd have an even harder time getting support from anyone. Would you mind DMing me the program name? And if you'd be willing to elaborate on your experience I'd love to hear about it (without names and all that stuff). For one reason or another people ask me for advise about where where to apply and what programs to attend. so I'd very much appreciate getting a first-hand account of a program that does not work out. And I could give you mine if you were interested I basically agree with @MrsPhD. But would: 1. Spend the summer researching new programs. Look at every program in the top-50 or so and write a list of programs that you could complete at an accelerated pace. When you have this list of 3-6 suitable programs, add a handful of programs where you'd be a good fit even if you had to start over. 2. Take an honest look at my application material. Depending on your GRE score most people would benefit from redoing it. Study all summer for it and take it 3-4 times in August-December. Use the Manhattan Prep Books to prepare and sign up for the online Magoosh and complete the full program within your time constraints. It's cheap and best bang for the buck. There is lots of advise on what material to use to prep for the GRE but if you use what I suggest you'd be able to get 160 at least in both sections, which will make you a contender for most programs (except top-10 programs maybe). Work on your writing sample. Adcoms are not looking for an incredible original paper I think but one that demonstrates your research interests, one that shows that you understand the basics of social science research methodology, and one that is fairly well written. Others may weigh in on this. Your SOP is the most important element of your application. It's the only piece of writing that you KNOW that adcoms will read for sure. So it has to be perfect, or almost perfect. There is also lots of advise on how to write this well, but I'd recommend asking @BunniesInSpace who knows a thing or two about how to write a good application. 3. Given that you said above, I'd then ask my original recommenders for a new set of recommendations. You'll have to come up with a good way of framing your request otherwise they may refuse. Other people may disagree with me on this though. I'd also consider not returning to your current program this fall. You'll have to weigh your options though. Hope this is somewhat helpful.

Maybe I was too harsh but I don't know how to say what I think about this without being a bit harsh. And yes, it does suck that the DGS one place is pushing him to make a decision.

April 15th is approaching everyone and this is a very nerve-wracking time!!! Hang in there!! I've both been rejected and accepted off a waitlist and know how tough the wait is. I was literally going insane checking and rechecking my email. It seems that most students with offers really do not make up their minds before April 15th so be prepared to wait another 2 weeks or so. In the unfortunate event that you do not get off the waitlist, you leave the application process with very important knowledge. There is a program out there that wants you and your chances should be good if you decide to apply again next year. My point is that if it does not work out, it's not all for nothing. Anyway, good luck everyone!! I really hope you all get admitted to your program of choice!

I doubt that most universities will have that knowledge. However, in the upper tiers it would not surprise me if adcoms across schools were in conversation with one another in order to admit as efficiently as possible. They all know one another anyway. Having seen many people struggle through this process, I have fairly strong opinions about this stuff. As you suggested yourself, the real problem is that it's really unethical to accept two offers knowing that one will ultimately have to return to one of the schools with some excuse. There are so many waitlisted people, sitting on the edges of their seats, waiting to hear back from somewhere. And it's devastating to have no where to go after after having been waitlisted for, say, three months. Maybe it is possible to admit people after they have been rejected from the waitlist, but it's not very nice for anyone. Besides, persons rejected from a waitlist (due to your friend's decision) may then make other arrangements and then accept other offers if they have any. So people who are re-admitted off the waitlist must now 1. either do what your friend did and turn down a school from which they had just accepted an offer, or 2, still due to your friends actions, loose out on (maybe) their dream school and stick with their original acceptance. And this is all because your friend could not decide between two offers. Your friend's actions may have pretty far reaching consequences and I would appeal to him by pointing these consequences out. An even more serious problem is that your friend starts his career in political science by lying, or being deceitful at least, to a whole bunch of people who have decided to take a chance on him. Perfect strangers who wanted to give him an opportunity. It seems to me that people like your friend is not just a "person who happens to lie" at a moment, he is just a liar. And it would not surprise me if his general attitude is in favor of cutting corners and do whatever is expedient in any given situation. This does not bode well for a career in academia and I would hope that such a person would reflect on his priorities. I do not know exactly what it takes to succeed in academia (does anyone?) but I do know that the kind of attitude that your friend seems to embody will not get him far. Literally everyone sees through that stuff right away. I said above that adcoms will likely not find out that one has accepted two offers - but if they do it would not surprise me for a moment if both programs retracted their offers. This should be deterrence enough. If I was you I would grab my friend encourage them to do the right thing. Besides, if your friend has a hard time choosing it's likely that the two offers are equivalent. So just pick one. I don't mean to come across overly harsh, but the whole application process takes a psychological, and even physical, toll on so many people and what your friend is planning on doing makes this, already very difficult process, even harder for everyone.

On thing that stands out to me is that Michigan is not ranked for political theory. I don't know if it ever was but I suspect that it was. All other subfields are ranked very high but not theory.

What are your other choices? And what are you interested in studying/researching specifically?

Where are you going instead, if I may ask?

Okay. I have you not heard from NYU yet? It might be a good time to reach out to them and check. I think I'd take Albany and not wait for Georgia if I was in your position

That's curious. I thought all programs had the April 15th deadline, but obviously I was wrong.

Ok different story. I understand that's a hard choice.

The application process is messy and trust me there is zero guarantee that you would have gotten into Harvard had you applied next year. Whether or not you get in depends on if a faculty member happens to have sufficiently overlapping interests with you and if that faculty member has space/capacity to take on a new phd student. It also depends on who is reviewing applications that particular year. Since you did not get admission to several other competitive programs, I would for sure count myself lucky and wait it out for Harvard. If you get into Harvard then that's amazing, but if you don't you should definitely go to Northwestern. The idea that you would have gotten in in a normal year year because you were waitlisted during covid does not make much sense to me. If you don't get off the waitlist, go to Northwester.

I'll just emphasize that the application process is truly messy. It's possible you did nothing wrong at all and simply was rejected. Even the most qualified applicants should count themselves lucky to get into MIT and many do not get in. That's unsatisfying of course but if you apply to more programs next year you'll increase your odds. I understand your apprehension about coming to the US but, despite all the difficulties, things are great her. In my opinion at least. What do you all think? Yes there is division these days and many things I don't like, but at least it's true that in any phd program you'll find like-minded, curious, intelligent, and brilliant people. I also find that the division is exaggerated - most normal people get along just fine in spite of political differences. Everything is blown up on the news but you could really come here and make a great life for yourself (I think).

I wonder if this is a correct use of the downvote on the original post? I mean one can disapprove of the rejection but still support the person rejected.

In that case i think it would be safe to call them up and ask

It's hard to wait but least you already have incredible/outstanding/amazing/mind-blowing options