ovejal

Hi all! First-year PhD student who used the board last year popping in to wish you all good luck. The application process really sucks but I promise you you all will make it through. Make sure you recognize both the benefits and drawbacks of this board - it is great to connect with others going through the same thing as you but make sure you find things to do outside of checking this board, especially once you get to late January/early February. I'm not sure I have much to offer at this point in the process but feel free to shoot me a message if you think I can be of any help. Again, best of luck!

I wouldn't worry about it, especially if you have a perfect score on the GRE already. Admissions folks will use your personal statement and writing sample to gauge your writing abilities, so take the time you save from not retaking the GRE to polish both of those up.

Just saw this and assuming it's too late to be helpful to you, but I'll answer in case anyone else has a similar question. The ones I've been to generally start with a welcome session where the DGS walks you through the broad strokes of the program (e.g. required coursework, recent placements) as well as some introduction of the area you'd be living in. Then (in no particular order) there are some subfield-specific sessions with faculty and grad students, maybe a session on the methods sequence, a meeting with only grad students to get "unfiltered" insight on the program. Most give the opportunity to meet with relevant faculty. They're informative but also a bit boring, especially considering that they are being held via Zoom this year. In a normal year it would be a really good opportunity to familiarize yourself with the area.

PROFILE:Type of Undergrad Institution: Large R1 public schoolMajor(s)/Minor(s): International Relations and EconomicsUndergrad GPA: 4.0Type of Grad: n/a (applying directly from undergrad)Grad GPA: GRE: 169/161/4.5Any Special Courses: Above average quantitative background but not exceptional (stats, econometrics), 4 years of relevant language. Letters of Recommendation: two tenured and one tenure track faculty. Two in my subject area, other is my thesis adviser. Worked very closely with all three. Teaching Experience: Some tutoring experience but otherwise none. Other: Presented at MPSA and accepted to present again. Language study abroad + fellowship. Working paper published at well-known data institute. RESULTS Acceptances: Ohio State, Michigan State, Florida, Emory (all funded) Rejections: Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, UCSD, Berkeley, Vanderbilt, Cornell, Wisconsin, UCLA, Penn State, Northwestern Waitlist: Yale Going to: probably Emory, Yale if I get in LESSONS LEARNED 1. Nothing new compared to the people above: the process is terribly idiosyncratic (although fit does matter). For this reason, you'll have to try to separate your self-esteem from your application results, which is of course very close to impossible. For example, Wisconsin was one of my best fit schools both substantively and methodologically; one of my letter writers is also an alumni of their PhD program who has maintained close ties with faculty there. I had a very good interview and was subsequently rejected, which I later learned from another GradCafe user was likely due to the fact that my most likely adviser had about four students who had deferred the year before. 2. Echoing the person above who recommends casting a wide net. As you'll notice from my quite lengthy list of rejections, I took this approach (perhaps too far) and I do believe it lessened my stress. This is related to everyone's point that the process is idiosyncratic. 3. Start your SOP early. This especially applies to those who are in school while applying. I started mine in the summer and was able to get through a round of revisions (all three of my recommenders, one grad student) with before classes started, which saved me a lot of stress by the time December came around. 4. More on the SOP from one of my faculty recommenders: demonstrate that you understand what being an academic means. For me, this meant clarifying why I viewed myself as primarily a scholar of comparative politics who also draws on IR literature. It also meant explaining how I planned to use my economics background in conjunction with my language training to produce mixed methods research. Rightly or wrongly, academics work in their own boxes of substantive and methodological orientation. Show where you fit. 5. Think about backup plans early. I was fortunate to receive this advice early from a recommender and acted accordingly. Even though I've been admitted to PhD programs, I am waiting to hear back from a couple of yearlong fellowships that I would be able to pursue and defer my entry to my PhD program for a year. Options like that relieve stress and you can work with your PhD program to still pursue even when you are accepted. 6. Not advice per se, but worth noting that I did not reach out to POIs. It might be useful in determining your fit for a program or a specific scholar's work, but it does not seem to affect your admissions chances. I've been really grateful for this community, both for the useful information and for the truly brilliant scholars I've gotten to know a little bit through the forum. I forced myself to get a Twitter as I enter grad school, so I'll leave that link in my signature for a little bit if anybody wants to keep in touch. Future applicants should feel free to shoot me a message - best of luck to anybody reading this!

+1

For more specific info you should definitely chat with your recommenders (who I assume study at least somewhat related areas to you). You should also look at Iowa's placement data here https://clas.uiowa.edu/polisci/graduate/recent-placements Thank you for the kind words! This was a tough cycle but I'm glad to have the offers that I do. Congratulations to you too on your acceptance to Iowa! My interests are borderline of IR and CP but my skillset and methodological orientation is much more CP. My undergrad degree is in IR so I naturally started assuming that I would apply as IR, but as I worked on more research and did some thinking I felt CP was a better fit (and 2/3 of my recommenders, who I worked with extensively, are CP as well). Feel free to PM me if you want to chat further!

Welcome! I can't say much but one of my recommenders suggested I look into Iowa early on in my process when I thought I would apply as IR. He said that Iowa has especially strong faculty that study conflict, but it seemed they didn't have much as much outside of that area. Depending on your interests, it is probably worth looking into further!

Hi - Yale's waitlist response was via the portal, but (after discussing with my recommenders) I ended up sending a short email to the DGS expressing my continued interest and inquiring about the length of the waitlist. His response didn't indicate such an email was inappropriate, so that's one option.

Same here on all three points

+1

Claiming Duke rejection and Yale waitlist.

Also finally received NW rejection

Nope, he got an acceptance in late January. OSU has a weird funding mechanism where all prospective grad students (of all disciplines) compete for funding after they are admitted. As the department doesn't know which students will be selected, they admit some who do not end up with funding. (I don't guarantee the exact accuracy of that description of OSU's funding setup, that is how it was explained to me)

My understanding of a friend's experience is that he did not initially receive funding but was told he might receive funding as others declined their offers. Leading up to the April 15th decision date he still could not get a clear answer and eventually decided to attend elsewhere. I'm sure his experience is a bit of an outlier but going through that does not sound fun.

I feel like initial info should come this week, but I've also heard some horror stories from past applicants about a really drawn out process.