pascal450

Apologies for quoting myself. The tide has really turned -- I was fortunate to be accepted to all seven schools that sent out decisions after the initial four rejections. All are in the USNWR's Top 15. So please don't despair! Sometimes the best news comes at the least expected times!

I was rejected by Princeton, Berkeley, Duke, and Wisconsin-Madison. My first acceptance came today, and all I can say is that the process is extremely arbitrary provided that you meet the minimum requirements. People on this forum have talked about math, SOP, research experience, GPA, etc being important factors in the admissions process. But my experience tells me that even if you excel in all these areas, it's still not sufficient. (N=1, so take my words with a grain of salt.) I took advanced math and programming classes and graduated with a minor in computer science. I worked as a research assistant for two CHYMPS political science professors and got recommendation letters from both of them. My GRE scores are in the 95% percentile for all three subsections, and my GPA is in the top 20% of my class at a top 20 university. I wrote my undergraduate thesis on political economy, and the project involved a lot of heavy programming. The two CHYMPS political science professors read my SOP and said it was good. I wrote two paragraphs for each school emphasizing research fit. All that is to say that I still got rejected almost everywhere despite these credentials. I honestly do not know what I would do differently to improve my chances. I would think it's the same for a lot of great applicants, like @acmnny and @Chronicoverthinker. Also, I think research fit is too subjective to be a useful topic of discussion. I met with another CHYMPS professor recently, and he said my research idea was "uninteresting" and "did not speak to any larger issue in political science." But the two professors I worked with both liked my proposal and one said he hired me because I wrote it in my job application. I think a more productive approach to rejections is simply accepting the arbitrariness of life. If you meet the minimum standards (90% GRE, okay GPA at a known university, good letters from people who do research, some research experience), there's no use faulting yourself for rejections or thinking you could've done things differently to improve your chances. The process is simply just random, like job searches and the search for a romantic partner or a true friend. Finally, there's a lot of reporting bias on this forum. I wouldn't have created an account to share my experience had I not received an acceptance today. So when you see people getting multiple acceptances, know that they are hundreds of others who have been rejected everywhere or who have only gotten into one school. Please don't think less of yourself as a person or as a political scientist just because there are two or three people getting accepted everywhere. TLDR: The process is random. Pedigree definitely matters, especially when it comes down to picking two people out of the final ten. Research fit is super subjective, so don't worry about it if you've said what you wanted to study in your SOP. And if you don't think there's anything you can change, either apply again next year or find a job! The application process says nothing about you as a scholar let alone a person.