Nickleby

Thanks, it's sometimes hard to remember there are humans behind those acronyms? Actually, I have heard this particular DGS is a great guy, so it's nothing personal. I also think Northwestern has a great program, perhaps operating above rank, but it would be nice if the decision of who will be DGS for the year could take into account field work and volume of other administrative duties, particularly if these are spanning several departments, etc.

Interesting, thanks for posting! It does seem (from past discussion in the forum) like Northwestern has done almost precisely the same in the past, including last year. And the department admin as well as the DGS have been completely non-responsive throughout the process, or at least that has been my experience and the experience of some of my classmates (as well as a common complaint in the forum this year and in the past). While it's understandable that competitive schools with limited resources might get overburdened at times, the majority of Northwestern's competitors (and the top 25 in general, not sure about others) do not behave this way. Some might be curt at times, but most are responsive, and many are courteous and even helpful. It's really baffling.

This seemed odd to me, too, considering in past years at least a few people posted acceptances, and it also seems like these came pretty close to waitlists and rejections. Also, it doesn't seem possible they'd admit an Americanist without it being you! Congrats on all!

Also just noticed we hijacked a Michigan v. OSU thread. Sorry OP!

Yikes, I just noticed concerning news from Hillcrest. Maybe wait a few days to Google it?. Great neighborhood though.

Unfortunately, no, I don't know much about UCSD (except that, if you go there, I might advise you to look for housing in Hillcrest or Ocean Beach or somewhere nearer to downtown, rather than in LaJolla, but that's personal preference ? )

Chicago has seen an extended slump, apparently (or as reported by many) partly/largely related to internal struggles between faculty that led to a lot of turnover. Also, for a stretch they had a chair who focused a lot on hiring theorists (or maybe more accurately "for some reason they were able to hire a lot of theorists for a period and were drained in other subfields") and they suffered in the area of keeping quant professors and attracting/grooming quant students. Well, we know which subfields the market has favored for some time now, so a natural consequence is that Chicago's placement has fallen in quality and quantity. I think pscwpv is probably correct that Chicago is on an upswing (at least trying to hire a lot of quants and non-theorists now), so I'd expect them to soon start placing better. One thing is fairly certain, with so much investment there, there's little threat they'll ever manage to fall out of the top 15, while this possibility is pretty real for a lot of the other schools that are sitting around 10-15. This is just one opinion on Chicago, of course, and I'm a degree removed. Regardless, great to be able to choose between two top schools, congratulations!

Is it correct that USNews is based strictly on reputation score, as gathered from the opinions of professors at the 120 or so PhD granting institutions? If this is true, it makes sense that the rankings would seem, on average, pretty "accurate" to most. It would also make sense that rankings are very hard to move, or that they might move quite a lot all of a sudden for some school, due to small shocks, then remain artificially low if redemptive information is slow to disseminate.

I'm pretty sure most people interpret it as C=Cal - for now - which I gathered just from noting answers to others' questions. That said, I don't know how long the acronym has been around (in the grad polisci setting), but there are plenty of years in the not-too-distant past when Columbia (more recent) and Chicago (less recent, but not so distant) each rivaled or outranked Cal in many if not all subfields. As for the undergrad meaning, it sure wouldn't make any sense if M=Michigan or C=Cal, but would certainly make sense if C=either Columbia or Chicago, and M=MIT.

This is an extremely idiosyncratic process. I'm sorry to hear you've had to deal with so much rejection (what a crappy feeling, even if you're in good company). One thing I wonder about is your dual applications, to sociology and political science. I'm sure you realize this is extremely unusual, and I wonder how you have dealt with it in terms of letter writers? I'm assuming you have two totally separate sets of letter writers, and I'm assuming that each knows that you are applying in the other discipline? I have to assume this would raise concerns among both sets, with respect to their impression of your commitment to either discipline. I am confident that my letter writers are in part selling my strong commitment to, and total immersion within, political science. For that matter, I know at least two of them wrote specifically about my particular interest in, and aptitude for, my sub-sub discipline. And one of them made me strip my SOP of the word "policy" for several schools, fearing that I would appear oblivious to the tradition of disciplinary boundaries at those schools. If you decide to go another cycle (big IF given your acceptance at BU and maybe other places), I would suggest picking one discipline or the other and having a direct conversation with your letter writers (who will preferably be strictly tenured political science faculty, if you pick polisci) to make sure they are convinced of your devotion to the study of political science and your thorough preparation for rigorous study and research in your chosen subdiscipline. Good luck, and I hope you can chuck my advice right out the window when you either decide on BU or you receive a "yes" from a preferred school!