Jump to content

surreynotsurrey

Members
  • Posts

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    USA
  • Program
    PhD Political Science

Recent Profile Visitors

637 profile views

surreynotsurrey's Achievements

Decaf

Decaf (2/10)

4

Reputation

  1. Hi there, I'll do my best to answer your questions. However, I really suggest talking to someone in the non-profit research industry in your desired field as they will best know what preparation you need to lead a thinktank dealing with judicial issues. I currently have a JD, have practiced law in the past, and am just about to start my PhD to research judicial politics. As such, I have limited knowledge about what is required to be taken seriously in this field. I can't really answer your first question, but I can say that the topic of reorganizing judicial appointments is broad and when you begin your graduate education, you'll figure out how to parse this question out and focus on smaller questions towards your overall goal. Starting an organization from the bottom-up is really hard, which is why many researchers just join academia and conduct their own studies. For example, I know of no organizations doing what I want to do, and I will likely try to stay in the academy. Second, if you want to study the judiciary, absolutely focus on getting your JD first. There are scholars with only a PhD, only a JD, or have both. Those with both are the most respected, but you can absolutely get by with just a JD. Ultimately, I would argue that if you go to a top law school (think T-10) and you clerk after graduation, you likely do not need a PhD in a related field like Politics unless you want your work to be super quantitative (which is why I am doing a PhD). Ultimately, if you want your research to be based in legal thought and procedure, do the JD. If you want to analyze quantitatively why changing the judicial appointment process is beneficial, do a JD and a PhD in a quant related field. If you score really high on the GRE and LSAT (and have good grades of course), you may be able to do both a JD and PhD at the same time, and your JD might even be paid for (for instance, Vanderbilt has such a program for JD and PhD in Economics). Do research on this before proceeding. Third, a PhD is absolutely more flexible in this context. Thinktanks will hire MAs, JDs, and PhDs, but universities will only hire JDs or PhDs or JD/PhDs for both.Echoing my above answer, if you are serious about researching the judiciary, do a JD first and maybe even a PhD as well if you have the stamina. Hope this helps!
  2. https://www.phdstipends.com/ check this website out - super insightful about letting you know the stipends at American and other unis in DC. I have never lived in DC but it does seem a bit low, best to contact grad students at American and see how they get by.
  3. I decided on UVA - felt really happy with the connections I made with the faculty and think it's a good place for my interests. You?
  4. Makes sense - this is a really competitive process with a lot of rejection, so this result might hurt more because of that. But, if you've been that dedicated to your program, then they are missing out by not locking you down as a student to publish for the department. I should note - the ratio of 2 waitlists to 2 rejections is pretty good! Definitely promising that you may get some good news soon.
  5. That's a hard pill to swallow - I'm sorry to hear that. I keep seeing these posts about overqualified applicants keep little to zero offers this cycle. One thing to keep in mind when applying to your own school are the politics of the admissions committee. Maybe they don't have the best relationship with your recommenders? Maybe they have a personal agenda to advance policy field research that isn't connected to yours? Applying to your own school can be a massive advantage, but it can easily backfire. So please don't see the waitlist as a reflection of your research abilities or contributions to the school - I have a feeling there are other forces at play.
  6. Hi all! Applying for a PhD in Public Policy (Not sure if this is the place to ask?). If not, just disregard this message. I posted on this forum last year applying for my current MPP and it was really, really useful. Cycle: 2022-2023 Schools / Programs: HKS, Chicago Harris, Carnegie Mellon Heinz, Duke Sanford, USC Price, Syracuse Maxwell, Yale Undergrad: No Name School Law School: Top 3 in Canada Masters: Top 3 in Britain Current MPP: USC Price GPA: 3.85/4.0 Collectively GRE: 160Q, 162V, 5.0 AWA Work Experience: 3 years as a tax lawyer Research Experience: Collectively three years or so of policy research experience. Currently two published articles and hopefully more by the time of application. Policy Area of Interest: Tax/Economic Policy LOR: Current research supervisors + dissertation supervisor from Masters. Very strong references. Quant Experience: 8 courses in statistics (including econometrics and causal inference) and published two papers based on novel applications of statistical methods. SOP: Ties my experiences through school and work together into my desire to study and implement new tax policies based on the use of novel statistical methods.
  7. Hi all, I am applying to Political Science PhDs next year and need to know if I need to take Calculus 1/2 over the summer. I have a very heavy applied statistics background (I conduct research in my spare time, write publications on, and work for people using Structural Equation Modeling, applied Bayesian methods (MCMC), causal inference techniques, econometrics (not calculus based), etc.). I use statistical methods on a daily basis and can also use two statistical software programs fluently (Stata and R). All of this will be evident in my application. I noticed that many Political Science PhDs now have "Math Camps" and even full semester courses introducing students to Calculus. For clarity, I am not averse to taking Calculus (at all). I just need to know if it is necessary to do so before applying, otherwise I will try improving my application in other ways. Thank you so much in advance.
  8. I picked Cambridge and LSE because Oxford appears to strictly want a reference from your current school. At the time I applied, I only had been in my current program for a month or so, so it was unrealistic for me to get a meaningful reference from any of my professors. However, Oxford appears to be a perfectly good option from my perspective. Good luck with your decision!
  9. Background info : Current grad school student and former lawyer. Applied to: LBJ MPAff, HKS MPP, USC Price MPP, LSE MPA, Cambridge MPP Accepted to: USC Price MPP ($$), LBJ MPAff (In-State Tuition), LSE MPA ($) Rejected from: HKS MPP, Cambridge MPP Still waiting: Undergrad Institution: Large Canadian Institution Law School: Top Canadian School Graduate School: Current MSc Candidate at a top 3 British Institution Years of experience: 3 Undergrad GPA: 3.95 Law School GPA: Top 25% GRE: Q 160, V 162, AW 5.0 Quant experience: Beginner Stats; Causal Inference; Multivariate Stats; Econometrics; Microeconomics; Macroeconomics; Formal Logic; I can use R, Python and Stata. Relevant Work Experience: Lawyer for one of the largest law firms in the world. International volunteering experience. Worked as a research assistant. A few publications to my name. International experience: International volunteering. Currently studying in the UK. Strength of LOR: Very strong LORs. References were from a judge, a law school dean, and a partner at my former firm. SOP: Very strong in my opinion, was able to highlight my work experience and various volunteering to highlight my commitment to public service.
  10. Should've been clearer in my last post - I was also admitted to the MPP. However, I agree with river_xo_song, given tthat admitted students day is next week, I'm sure there will be some more movement on Price admissions.
  11. Was admitted yesterday with a 50% scholarship!
  12. Ah that makes sense - I would agree that HKS, Duke, and Michigan are arguably better choices then. My angle on policy even now is very interdisciplinary so it's important for me to go to a school where I can take courses and collaborate with others from different departments (one of the reasons I applied to LBJ, HKS and Price). I'll certainly be applying to more schools after this - very grateful for your help!
  13. Very insightful - from the perspective of an applicant it can be difficult to tell a school's strength in a particular area, so I will look very seriously at all of these schools. I'd say I'm a fairly strong researcher - why do you say Princeton and Syracuse subject to that condition?
  14. I am also interested in other social policy areas (with health currently being the most prominent) so there is still a strong benefit for me to enrol in an MPP so I can test different areas. However, I will look at those MPH programs as it sounds like they may be compatible for my interests too, considering I could develop quant skills there as well. You've been so helpful - thank you very much for your thoughtful responses and guidance!
  15. I should elaborate on my goals a bit: My main policy interest is in health. I am currently writing my dissertation on behavioural interventions and preventable diseases and hope to continue this work in my future education and career. My strength is in behavioural research but not in proposing and assessing policy outcomes. I wish to develop my quantitative policy skills (particularly in policy economics, program evaluation, etc.) through an MPP program. I also hope to learn more about health policy in the US through both course work and potentially conducting research with faculty members. The health policy strengths at LBJ, Price and HKS were what made me decide to apply to those schools, and eventually I was won over by speaking with some of their faculty.
×
×
  • 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