billk

Claiming LSE waitlist. Kind of shocked (was top of class in CP Master's and published during it), but it just underscores the importance of fit I guess.

I think it is explicitly USNWR. Other rankings might matter more or less to different constituencies. For example, I know QS and THE matter more in the UK for pretty obvious reasons. I have seen some people cite Hix's ranking system. Other niche ranking systems might be given a lot of weight in specific sub-fields. For example, IR folks might care very much about FP's ranking.

I think it depends on your career goals. If you want to go into academia, then it's methods, methods, methods. It you want to go into policy, then it probably depends on the relative strength of the program and, importantly, it's engagement with policy and practice. Again, I think LSE trounces Oxbridge when it comes to policy. But, people in the private sector might be dazzled by the fancy reputations of Oxbridge.

I studied abroad at Oxford as a direct enroll student (granted not at the graduate level), but I completely agree with everything that's been said. Oxbridge is the vanilla ice cream of political science. Not engaging, super boring, and unnecessarily laborious. I got my Master's at LSE and loved it. Much more stimulating and a much, much stronger focus on methods that will make you a better researcher/thinker and more competitive on the job market.

Thanks e2e4. I think it's a perennial question. Is it better to be a big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a big pond? Reading through the previous comments, there are some arguments for the former that I find pretty convincing. 1. It's hard to tell if people from top 10 programs get jobs because they're from a top tier program or because they're a top tier PhD. You can obviously be a top tier PhD in non-top tier programs. This probably depends, as you suggest, a lot on fit since that will set you up to be in an environment where you're doing the best research you can. 2. Making connections with top tier scholars (not all of whom are at top tier programs) is really important for job chances. Not only can they write outstanding letters, but they can also let you in on their research and co-author with you, which is good for job market prospects, and they can let you access their network, which probably includes faculty at top tier programs. 3. Relatedly, working in sub-sub fields (in my case, comparative climate change politics) means working and networking with a fairly small group of scholars. So, going to conferences, reaching out to people, etc. all increase one's chances of being placed, too, regardless of your program's rank. I guess what I'm saying is that rank matters, but the question of whether it's better to be a big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a big pond is a bad question. It's probably equally good, and how big of a fish you end up being depends a lot on personal initiative and ambition. (Of course, it's better to be a big fish in a big pond and worse to be a small fish in a small pond.) From a faculty perspective, is this sort of how hiring committees consider people? I find it really hard to believe that applications from outside the top 25 are automatically shredded (and I probably wouldn't want to work at a university where that is the case). But, is it really that much harder for people from outside the top 25? I should add that, while I obviously want to achieve all that I can in my career, my life's dream has always been to just complete a PhD and become a professor, no matter the where and how of doing so. I don't really care about being a professor at Harvard. I just care about being the best political scientist I can be.

Thanks! It's mid/low 30s. I'll look back for an answer.

Could anyone offer advice on whether or not to take an offer from a non-top 25 program? The program I'm thinking of is the perfect fit for me, has a ton of professional development built in (including publication requirements/support), has a really large endowment, and has a really strong alumni network. I can see myself being so completely happy there that I really don't want its status as a non-top 25 school to dissuade me. I've heard some people say you should never accept an offer to a lower ranked school, and I've heard some people say that it depends. Could anyone help me sort of this mess? From a faculty perspective, how large of a role does rank play into the job market? Thanks!

Totally agree with your point about fit. One of my top choices, I was accepted largely because they're doing a big hiring push in my area this year. If I could go back and change my approach to the application cycle, this would be a major question I would ask of POIs: "What are faculty working on, and is the department making any new hires in any different areas?" Of course, I am sure your application was stellar regardless of fit, but just reiterating that point because I was shocked by how important that ended up being.

Also rejected by Stanford, but I feel the same way. The Bay Area is ridiculously expensive, far from home, and filled with wannabe Elon Musks. Congratulations to everyone who was accepted! Solidarity with those who were not. Stanford is missing out on some excellent candidates this year for sure!

Know that any program would be lucky to have you. Also know that, with what you've gone through, you've already accomplished a lot more than almost anyone on this forum. Huge respect for your grit and determination. Hang in there, it's only a matter of time.

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 10 IR school, #77 overall (US News) Major(s)/Minor(s): IR/Spanish Undergrad GPA: 3.91 Type of Grad: UK Master's, #4 in Politics, #44 overall (QS World University Rankings) Grad GPA: N/A, Distinction, prize for top of class GRE: V166/Q160/AWA6 Any Special Courses: Letters of Recommendation: Undergrad mentor (Summer fellowship, 2 conference papers), Grad mentor (Master's thesis supervisor), Former supervisor (RA in public policy think tank), Former supervisor (RA in environmental think tank). Research Experience: 2 funded fellowships (undergrad), 2 years postgrad RA experience, BA thesis, MSc thesis, 3 postgrad conferences, 4 undergrad conferences, editor experience for 2 undergrad journals, 1 grad journal, and 1 "real" journal. Teaching Experience: 2 years tutor, supplemental instructor for college-level ESL classes. Subfield/Research Interests: CP Other: IR RESULTS: Acceptances($$ or no $$): Notre Dame $$, UCSB $$. Waitlists: Rejections: Berkeley, Princeton. Pending: Stanford, LSE. Going to: Undecided. LESSONS LEARNED: I want to tell you all a horror story. I personally insulted the CP field convenor of my then-top choice PhD program, whom I reached out to to see if I was a good fit. She gave lots of negative -- not constructive -- criticism, saying that I didn't really understand what I was talking about and that I needed to take calc before applying, or else I would have a "major hole" in my application. Mind you, this is 1.5 months before the deadline. After, I emailed my mom to let her know how our meeting went, saying something like "she was not nice." Only, the thing is... I accidentally sent it TO THE FIELD CONVENOR. Needless to say, I did not get in. A big lesson I learned is to be humble. Take feedback (even negative feedback) gracefully, and don't retaliate by talking about someone behind their back. And always, always check the "To" line of your emails. Other lessons I learned were to start applications early, don't be afraid to go into a lot of detail in your SOP, and only apply where you think you would be a good fit. Even though I handled that situation the wrong way, looking back, I don't think I would have been happy in that program, nor would I have been able to handle the amount of pressure and negativity. Good luck with everyone's pending decisions! Wishing you all the best for the rest of this cycle and beyond.

Anyone else have an interview at LSE? How did you think it went?

Claiming the Notre Dame acceptance and LSE interview. Could not have asked for a better birthday present Congratulations to everyone who's been admitted. And good luck to everyone waiting to hear back. Remember, everyone here has worked so hard and deserves to get into their dream program!

Something that matters as much as, and possible even more than, grades/GRE scores is the fit. That's something I didn't really understand until yesterday, when I had my first interview. He talked about parts of my application that I didn't even think myself would be a good fit! Afterwards, I realized he was right. Sometimes, it's just really hard to tell what people mean by "fit," and what they're looking for beyond just the numbers. And, sometimes, you don't know until after you apply. Keep your head up, though I am sure any department would be lucky to have you!

Same. Good luck to everyone going to Berkeley! Hope to meet you all at conferences.