Jump to content

Artifex_Archer

Members
  • Posts

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Artifex_Archer

  1. Yep—I'm tuned in now. Would be great to have virtual meet-up sub-forums for admitted cohorts, since so many schools are doing online visiting days. I got lucky with some of the visiting days that were scheduled earlier... Also, could someone please assuage my anxiety over this quarantine stuff continuing into the fall? My nightmare scenario is that schools will decide to defer all new enrollment until who knows what. Logically, I know that wouldn't be economically feasible for an institution, but panic does funny things to people.
  2. HIGHLY recommend MAPSS. I’m an alum [technically of MAPH, its humanities equivalent, but I was much more active in the MAPSS community and everyone ended up thinking I was MAPSS]. I also was given some funding but required some loans. It is more than worth it, IMO.
  3. UW-Madison also cancelled. I understand that the schools feel like they're in a predicament, and really can sympathize, but I'm lost as to how a university can expect students to make a decision like this, sight unseen and with extremely limited access to current students/faculty/resources.
  4. Adding to my comment above... May I push slightly on your remark that you're curious about 'left-wing politics departments'? Most of the politics departments in the U.S. are left-wing, although some are certainly more so than others. That said, I've always enjoyed studying with professors and students with a variety of political and social views, especially when they're amenable to challenging mine [and others'] respectfully. I understand not wanting to have your own research thwarted because of a professor's bias; that's totally legitimate. But I rarely see that happen with left-leaning students. And the positivist turn, ironically, was more an outgrowth of left-wing social movements. Of course, most critical theory is also left-wing, so both the very positivist [hah] and very critical theory-oriented departments [of which there are fewer] are liable to be predominately leftist in orientation. This is not an attack, nor is it an attempt to hijack this thread, since some of my most valuable academic experiences have come from my being willing to extend the scope of the ideologies I engage with, both in and out of class. In general, though, I don't think you need to worry about finding a sufficiently left-wing political science department, and certainly not a CT-focused one. @lispenard is right that The New School is another great place to look. Finally, I do hope you apply to Northwestern again next year. People frequently re-apply to the same schools and get in. And Northwestern does sound like a good bet for your general research interests.
  5. That makes sense—I can't speak to Penn State but I declined an offer from Vandy last year [I'm in a different field than you]. It's a great school, and they're pretty methods-focused across subfields. I really hope you get to go to the Vandy visit days [not least because they really treat you well while you're there!]. It's a smaller program but a good one. Last year I met an admit who focuses on a similar area as you do and he seemed pretty intent on going. Obviously, my perspective is slanted, since I know nothing about Penn State, but I can vouch for Vanderbilt being a great school with some awesome faculty. They tend to try to hold onto their assistant profs, from what I gather. They're really working on being a strong up-and-coming department.
  6. Hey! I get where you're coming from with wanting a PoSc-specific decision forum. Are you averse to specifying the programs you're considering? Each university and department is different, and each will have different expectations for tenured vs. assistant vs. associate faculty. This also extends to courses taught, thesis/dissertation supervision requirements, etc. So without knowing a little bit more about the schools you're looking at, it may be difficult for anyone to give you the advice you need. Your best bet, however, is far and away to contact the faculty directly, tell them how excited you are to have the opportunity to work with them, and raise your concerns about whether their longer-run plans will align with your own. It's not rude to say that they played a significant role in drawing you to the university and that you'd like to be able to have them as a reader, going forward. [Note, too, that most schools WILL allow you to have outside faculty serve on your committee, though the specific rules on this also vary by department.] Congratulations on having one of those 'good' hard choices to make! I may post here with my own questions/concerns/ramblings later on.
  7. Didn't apply to Harvard, but in my experience the scattered 'phone call' admits are almost always trolls.
  8. Usually most schools that delay rejections send them out in early March. I'm not sure that UCLA keeps an 'official' waiting list and notifies applicants that are on it, but you may be on a 'roll-down' list, which adcomms will sometimes use in a similar capacity.
  9. Not sure if you're still looking, but this offer still stands if/when you are—famous last words, before the flood of first-year obligations kicks in. ? I'd be interested in blogging about my experience with the applications process. I'm one of those kids who looked quite good on paper and struck out twice before doing very well this third cycle. I've learned a lot and would especially like to discuss coping with coping badly [which is totally a thing], dealing with rejection, self-doubt, advocating for yourself, persevering, etc. Of course, I'm very glad to share practical tips and tricks for writing, studying, and GRE-ing as well. I'm also open to blogging about the first year, once it starts. So 1 and 2, I guess? Again, I understand the 'window' might be closed for now, but please drop me a line when it opens back up. I'd truly like to share what I've learned/am still learning. Thanks!
  10. Popping in to say that this is really great stuff, and, from what I've heard other adcomm members say, entirely true. I really wish I'd stumbled upon all of these 'inside confessionals,' or what have you, after my first [unsuccessful] PhD application cycle. It probably wouldn't have dulled the pain entirely, but the sting of 'rejection' wouldn't have been quite so pronounced. Instead I did everything 'perfectly,' on paper, and still wound up feeling like there was something irredeemably wrong with me. Thanks, @Dwar, for being such an awesome presence on these forums.
  11. Not something I would have done differently, per se, since I had to do it, but: WRITE AND EDIT. Get a gig doing so if at all possible. I've been very fortunate in that my job involves a lot of reading, writing and editing [I mean, essentially, that is my job. I work at a think tank and for a short time before that I was a writer at a PR firm]. The best way to become a better, more thoughtful writer—and the best way to desensitize yourself to the chagrin of reading/editing your own bad writing, which will be bad from time to time, or at least mine is—is to write. And edit. And read other academics' work. Another little tip: right before you write/tailor your SoP for School X, re-read your School X POIs' work. You'll organically pick up on one or two of their stylistic mannerisms, without sacrificing your own or, obviously, plagiarizing. Generally, these sorts of tonal similarities can convey compatibility. This can also help you to determine what level of rhetorical flourishes the faculty at a given school are/aren't okay with when it comes to apps. SoPs are typically NOT the place to worry about style or sounding poetic, aside from maybe the final paragraph—focus on substance, and style will follow. That said, if you work in a field that occasionally necessitates using some $500 words, reading your POIs' work can give you a clue as to how much jargon/loquaciousness they'll tolerate, and how to trim away the rest.
  12. This. Grad school apps are essentially job applications, whereas undergrad apps most assuredly are not. A good way to think of your grad school SoP is—among other things—as a cover letter. You are applying to work with/for your POIs and department.
  13. Hey @niceward [and anyone else who's in a similar situation]. If it's not too bold of me to say, I see you. (I think.) It's really lonely. Like, fingernails-clawing-out-your-insides lonely. I want to write a more thorough post on this later [mainly out of my own selfish need to process this stuff], but in brief: after a lot of success/luck—in terms of programmes, grades, scores, and self-guided projects/publications—I struck out the first year after I received my MA. The second go-around, I only got into one school, which really wasn't a good fit for me at all; it took a lot of faith, but I turned it down and re-applied a third cycle. I wasn't always the best at coping. Let me rephrase that: one of my research interests is Stoicism, and I'm sure that on many occasions, the way I reacted to my emotions and experiences had Seneca face-palming from beyond. And, you're right; friends and family often don't get how any of it feels. They don't know what to say to you. You don't know what to say to them. It's like not having any kind of emotional/experiential 'mirror'. And it's also depressing/slightly infuriating [on an internal level, usually] to have all of these passions and interests and not to have them echoed by those around you. From what you write it sounds like you're still waiting on a few schools. I'm sending my best thoughts that you and others get really great news, really soon. But regardless, please feel free to DM me at any time—even if, I don't know, you just want to gabble about the awesome research interests you undoubtedly have. Or if you want a sounding board. Or to be indignant, or to have any of the feelings you might judge yourself for having. This goes for anyone dealing with rejection/waiting: I don't care if what you really just need is to vent, stream-of-consciousness, to someone who maybe has some idea of what you're going through. If you want, I'm happy to provide... well, I guess since this is a forum, 'an ear' wouldn't be accurate, but a set of eyes, sure. Anyway, like I said. Sending lots of good thoughts. And if grad school is important to you, you're always allowed to try again. Keep writing; keep going; rock on.
  14. In addition to the suggestions above, I'd also ask him about his work. Doing so helps you in multiple ways. First of all, you do want to get a better sense of 'fit,' and secondly, people tend to enjoy talking about themselves, especially vis-à-vis the things they really care about. I'd also ask about faculty outside the department who may be studying topics that correspond with your interests—someone in the history department who writes on X, someone in the philosophy department who studies Y, etc. Remember—because people tend to forget these things when they're nervous—to thank him for his time both before and after the call; immediately afterward [if you don't take notes during], jot down a list of key items from the conversations; and then send a follow-up, thank you email that refers to at least one of those 'key items' [e.g., 'thank you for the book recommendation on____'; 'I was very encouraged when you mentioned the opportunities to ______ because ________ is very important to me,' etc.]. If you search elsewhere on GC there's a fairly extensive thread where people provided these and other suggestions. And good luck!
  15. I second [or whatever iteration we're on now] @captmarvel , @ihatedecisions , @Romcomulus, and @Dwar. No one 'takes anyone's spot,' as far as I'm concerned. [I know that phrase was used facetiously, so I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth here—no one actually made that accusation. But I think sometimes the idea lingers. It does for me, sometimes, if I'm being honest.] I don't think lower acceptance rates have much to do with less-committed applicants edging more-committed applicants out. Cohort size is contingent on funding, departmental politics, etc., and no matter what, you always have more people who 'deserve' to get in than spots available. If a less-committed applicant gets admitted and decides not to attend, presumably, the applicant at the top of the waiting list will be admitted in their stead. And compatibility does go a long way—so even if you have perfect marks and scores on paper, that's no guarantee of admission anywhere, especially if you're applying to 20 schools and polish off a series or two of 'cookie-cutter' apps. Re: selecting schools and being 'greedy' vs. 'cautious'—In general, I think applicants should pay special attention to what schools really stand out to them in terms of compatibility, which involves a number of material and immaterial factors. What schools, were you to obtain a PhD there, would be a 'better' choice than remaining in your current situation? Reach out to faculty, read their work [if you haven't already], ask questions, trawl these forums and see what people are saying about the schools you're considering. All that good stuff. In general, abiding by ranking alone is a fool's errand, although if you intend to go on the job market I wouldn't discount it entirely. There's the caveat, however, that ranking can shift quite a bit over a period of five or more years.
  16. UCLA sounds like a great bet, especially with folks like Dienstag, Panagia, and its Program in Experimental Critical Theory. Strongly considering accepting a PhD offer from them now. it’s true that it’s hard to find a department that’s solely geared toward critical theory, so cross-disciplinary opportunities are a must.
  17. VERY late to the UCLA admit party [that was a long 48 hours], but I'm claiming the Theory admit that was just posted. Hopefully I've been active enough on this forum to prove my non-trollery. [I waited until Wednesday so I could brace myself and also so I could open my email after Hebrew class, when I'd be feeling more positive no matter what.] By the way, this has been a nearly three-year-long process, post-MA, and I hope to be able to post more about my 'lessons learned' after all decisions are in. Suffice it to say that for now I'm an odd mix of proud, humbled, and INCREDIBLY excited for the next series of adventures.
  18. I should have mentioned the scholarship stipulation, yes. I was fortunate enough to have one; and I do mean that, since scholarship allocation is highly variable. With a scholarship, and with the name rec, it's a great investment.
  19. You might try UChicago's terminal MA programmes in either the Humanities or the Social Sciences. Aside from one core course [depending on which programme you're in], you have your pick of any of the courses, across any of the divisions. I'm an alum and highly recommend. You'll certainly find Heidegger and Schmitt scholars.
  20. I strongly favor re-taking, even for those who consider their scores 'good' [and they probably are!] Briefly, I'll give my priors, and then I'll state why I hold the position that I do. - I am in political science and write/work primarily as a political theorist. My subfields range from comparative to American, but theory is my primary field. This is important, since different departments and subfields have different expectations when it comes to applicants' GRE scores. - I also took the GRE prior to my MA. I used Kaplan [in person] to prepare, and I got a 167V/154Q/4.5 AWA. I was admitted to a top-ranked MA programme with that score. At the same time, I was cautioned that my quant score may be insufficient for admission to some of my target PhD programmes. - After receiving my MA, I used Magoosh online for quant prep. I also used the practice questions on the GRE Prep Club forums [you do not need to register to access most of the questions]. I. Trawled. Those. Forums. Most of the very difficult questions are fiendish, and that's exactly what you want. I also designed a personal 'GRE prep course' that was tailored to me and my individual study needs. It was a joy, and I would honestly pay someone else to allow me to conduct a similar course for undergraduates wherever I end up as a PhD student. Così, if I recall correctly, my score progression for all officially administered tests [the lowest and highest scores from V and Q are in red and green, respectively]: Pre-MA: 167V/156Q/4.5 AWA Post-MA, Pre-Magoosh: 170V/154Q/5.0 AWA Afterward: 168V/156Q/5.0 AWA 3 weeks after that: 170V/160Q/4.5 AWA The SDs and the centiles leapt quite a bit. So. Here's why I advocate re-taking: - You never know how much the GRE matters. Many schools will say that they 'don't have a GRE cutoff,' and perhaps they don't, officially, but a higher GRE score will never hurt you. And even simply retaking the test will often boost one's score somewhat. - Many professors will say that sometimes, considerable GRE score improvement can 'matter more,' in the aggregate, than the score itself. I feel like it behooves you to send your combined score report if you improve quite a bit. For me, if I were sitting on an admissions committee and I saw someone jump by one or more SDs, or 20 centiles, that would speak volumes to me about the student's tenacity, self-directedness, discipline, and capacity to improve over time. - I'm in the humanities, and I hear different people say different things about how the GRE bears on STEM vs. Humanities applications. For STEM candidates, I've heard that the verbal score is often used to gauge basic communications skills [same with AWA], whereas for humanities candidates, I've heard that AWA really isn't considered [the writing sample matters more] and that the quantitative score is used to evaluate problem-solving skills [which makes sense, again, since most of the quant section has to do with pattern-matching, and on plenty of occasions, the only 'math' involved on the most difficult questions amounts to little more than adding 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 and subtracting that from 100; whereas the difficulty comes from spotting that this is what you need to do]. - On a personal level, it's really cool to see yourself improve and to know that you did that. It's also really cool to find ways to make studying for the GRE fun. [Again, I promise this is possible; I am Exhibit A for this.] As for recommended resources, in addition to GRE Prep Club, I wrote a fairly extensive post some time ago about my views on different study materials and strategies. Your mileage will absolutely vary, but my post/follow-up posts are on this thread: Good luck, both with the GRE and with your applications! I hope this at least helps somewhat, and again, it's just my personal experience. Others will chime in with their own perspectives and anecdotes.
  21. I’m not sure. I do think that at least a few more are likely. But we also don’t know how many of the first batch were real. In general, I think it’s futile to try and play too many guessing games with this. I try not to, apart from trying to gauge the general time frame for admissions and rough size of admit cohort. But even that can vary considerably from year to year. I also try to insulate myself from getting too desperate, either with expectation or with doubt. It’s easier said than believed/done, but: There will be people who get into higher ranked scores who look ‘worse’ than you on paper. There will be people who only get into lower ranked schools who look ‘better’. So much of this is fungible and arbitrary. And these decisions can be grueling for faculty as well. You worked really hard and deserve to be proud of your effort and all the achievements that got you here. Right now, that’s all you can know, and you can and should move forward with that certainty regardless. I think that’s important to keep in mind for acceptances as well as denials.
  22. If this were the case, it would be very uncharacteristic for a number of reasons. I’m not one to give people false hope [especially since hope is a Hesiodic vice, yo], but here’s what’s up: - Let’s waive the low GRE. Fact is Northwestern accepts lower GREs, given ranking. - Northwestern, historically speaking, sends out both acceptances and denials all throughout the month of February. This would be both slightly early and against pattern if this first wave were the only wave of acceptances Northwestern had to offer. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that this first wave is entirely legitimate and only contained acceptances. There would still be more waves, with scattered acceptances and increasing amounts of denials, over the next few weeks. - As stated before, people who like trolling but, like, in the least entertaining and economical way possible, given its cost-benefit analysis, will watch GC forums and post/re-post for different schools given the amount of ‘bite’ they think they’ll receive. Since there’s been so much speculation about whether the initial Northwestern results were valid, IF they weren’t [I’m agnostic on this], I can see someone making them look ‘more’ valid by posting a later acceptance. Again, I’m dealing with two hypotheticals in this post: one where the first wave contained legitimate acceptances; and one where it didn’t. This bullet stipulates that it did not. - For a school like Northwestern to have no CLAIMED admissions in a cycle would be unprecedented. Every year is different, and there’s a first time for everything. But that’s just odd. Very odd, especially given everything else.
  23. From memory, their website states that anything BELOW 148 Quant means that one’s chances of admission are ‘low’. I can’t recall off the top of my head what they said about Verbal, but Northwestern is known for accepting applicants with lower GRE scores, relative to program ranking. I do think the fact that the post in question reported receiving the exact ‘unofficial minimum’ GRE Quant score is odd.
  24. 1. Dwar is correct that Northwestern will often send out multiple waves of acceptances and rejections. 2. Six admissions is a pretty tiny cohort for Northwestern. 3. Barely-late January is also pretty early for Northwestern. 4. I’m not too sketched out by the low stats on some of the results—Northwestern is known for being pretty liberal with GRE scores—but I am sketched out by the fact that none have been claimed. If it’s trolling, it’s a slightly more skillful type of trolling than we’re used to seeing, but I’d still place a modest bet on this being a fake-out. If it’s not, I’d place a much less modest bet on there being more admissions to come.
  25. Claiming a Wisconsin-Madison theory acceptance. You all had me terrified; I saw the results page this morning and have been waiting to check my email all day. First acceptance. This has been a very long adventure so far—for now, I’ll just say that purposeful tenacity pays off—and I’m excited for it to continue. Best of luck and congratulations to all!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use