balderdash

I'm American.

I'll give you the advice I've been given, which I feel puts it in perspective nicely: "Why give them an excuse to throw out your application? 500+ other applicants can get it under the word limit, and there's nothing special about you, snowflake. Treat it like a speed limit."

Apply in the UK, where GRE scores aren't needed.

I definitely agree that it's better at least for schools to not tell you it will update and then never update it. I'd rather have the "Nope, you just have to trust you've sent everything" than keep refreshing the site every day. My recommender is actually not really the flaky type, which is why it surprises me that she's so behind on it. But that said, with professors I guess it's not so much their personalities that matter but rather how important writing a letter is. I just wish my life's ambitions got momentarily boosted to above "read Book #12523 for my new article."

So Columbia says that it takes a week to update your status once materials arrive at the office. Lies. It's taken mine over a month, so I emailed a few weeks back. They responded that they wouldn't even start doing Poli Sci ones until this week. Still no update. Princeton isn't better. They gave a Nov 15th date for when updates would appear, then the entire system went down for about a week. Now they say the 25th to the 26th is when we can check. MIT, Harvard, and Stanford simply have no way of investigating your progress. Also, my 1 professor still hasn't submitted ANY of her letters for my 7 applications. The first deadline is December 1, and the rest follow shortly. I'm stressin'.

A little bit of thread necromancy there, dude.

I wouldn't cut; it shows style. But that's just an opinion (from a so-so writer).

Ok, so first of all, definitely don't use a service that makes you pay for the pleasure of having your grade converted. Second, RLemkin, you're doing the calculation wrong. I've never, ever ever ever seen a chart that gives a borderline 2:1 as a 3.0. For the Scottish 20-point system, here's a conversion chart from St Andrews: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/Grade%20Conversion%20United%20States.pdf . As you can see, a 2.1 that's just barely not a first would be a 3.7, which is accurate. As for the British marking system, you're looking at (very roughly): 74+ 4.0 70-73 3.8 67-69 3.7 65-67 3.5 63-65 3.3 60-62 3.0 55-59 2.7 50-54 2.4 ... And by the way, as I've told a bunch of people: no matter where you're applying, you are not the first using your grading system to do so. They've seen Scottish, British, Ugandan, North Korean, whatever applicants before, and they'll understand the system you use. Follow the directions on the application to the best of your ability and let them do their job by interpreting the scores themselves.

I have some contacts in SAIS admissions. I know for a fact that with the exams such as the GRE, they know that it's just one test on one day. People mess up, don't feel well, et cetera. That's why GPA (and letters of rec, personal statements, experience) matters much more, as it shows your work over years. So whether or not they see the essay is a moot point - they know the limitations under which you wrote it, and that it's not necessarily indicative of your ability. And besides, you got a 1520. So they won't even glance at the essay even if it is sent to them. Basically, I would recommend just chilling out.

I think it's fairly strong given the USMC background, GPA, and think-tank experience. But where is the grad-level work, and what is your undergrad background look like (ie, were they at unknown public schools, top-20 LACs, etc)?

Colleges have a lesser role at the DPhil level than they would for the BA level. Your department has control over your education, but the College is the center of your social life. It also gives you access to resources (funding, libraries, travel grants, etc). All in all, I would say it matters less than for undergraduates, and the calculus is certainly different. You want a rich college with good accommodation that is near your faculty. The facilities vary depending on college, but you won't want for resources. It's a different system to negotiate, as it's all decentralized (as opposed to the US schools). But overall, as good as anywhere. People are friendly and outgoing. It's the only place in the world where guys can wear salmon-colored trousers every day and no one bats an eye... Generally speaking, Oxbridge is great for social life because you have separate circles of friends: your department, your college, your activities, etc. If I were you, I would live in College first year to be part of the whole experience. But it depends on which college you're at and what your preferences are. As for the PM, coming right along.

No Cambridge? Most MPhils here are 1 year.

Look, we're joking because it's a bit silly. I think for me the point is that quant helps, but it's not necessary. If I wanted to specialize in heteroskedacity or something then I wouldn't be applying for Poli Sci. Also, you're a bit off base with the whole "desperate tangents," "paranoia," and "some people's apprehensions" bit. It's not that we're "scared" of quant: I took multivariable calc in high school and loved it, and I'm sure that my experience isn't at all unique to the forum. It's just that it's not where the passion is. And I don't think that I should subjugate my academic endeavors to something as base as pandering to adcomms or potential hiring committees. If they want me for my theory and specialization, they'll take me whether I've taken 4 quant courses or 5. I'm just not going to do something I don't like to get hired to do more of what I don't like. If that means taking a PhD and going to work in the policy world, c'est la vie. But life's too short to spend it poring over regressions.

Last.fm: Charles Mingus, Thelonious Monk, Davis, Coltrane, and all the others: it's how to get reading done without losing your sanity.

(joking. kind of.)

Ah, that's good to know. Thanks for the heads-up, and good luck with your apps. I look forward to seeing that analysis.

First of all, congrats. I'm (an American) at Cambridge now, and I can practically guarantee that you're going to love it here. For the first set of questions: The thing about the strength/reputation of Cambridge programs is that unless you're planning on living and working in the UK, it won't matter. I was weighing LSE and Cambs before deciding on the latter, partially because in terms of reputation, the latter wins out irrespective of the program. To reiterate, this isn't universally true, but for practically all PhD programs and academic positions in the US, it holds. I don't know about the particular program's graduates, but I would contact the department. Now that you've been accepted, they'll gladly have a phone chat with you on what previous students are now doing. As for funding: It's pretty much passed for the Trusts and other huge programs, but the College you get may have specific scholarships. Once you get word what College you'll be at, check out their funding. Also, there may be small departmental grants, but I get the feeling that yours won't have much (as it's not an enormous dep't). Honestly, total costs are likely to run you $40k for the degree, so loans could work. It's not ideal, but it's better than a 2-year, $50k annually degree from the States. PM me if you have any Cambs-specific questions!

I've submitted 7 apps for a PhD in Poli Sci, and I only need one recommender to finish off her letters for them to be complete. So in effect, yeah, I'm waiting. But unlike yours, I guess, I won't hear until early to mid-March!

Check out Federal Hill, Fell's Point, Mt Vernon, Inner Harbor, Roland Park, Hampden, Charles Village, and definitely head out to Ellicott City sometime when you have a free afternoon. Also, if you like food: The Helmand, Brewer's Art, Soup's On, Petit Louis, Regi's, and the Ambassador were a few favorites of mine. But generally speaking, the city is really good for eating.

Ah, you couldn't be more right. I did indeed mean Wood, but I guess reading a Blattman article at the time created a communication breakdown between brain and fingertips.

Well, as a filthy Tab, I'll add this tidbit: I've got a friend at Merton who is really getting sick of the fact that they have formal hall every night. He says it's a constant celebration of the fact that they've matriculated, without actually doing much work. Also, he finds his course (a social sciences MPhil) to be really cutthroat: people will openly deride each others' work in discussion. But as for the former, I think that's just a college-specific thing. If you don't want formal halls and freeflowing drinks, don't go to a formal college. As for the second, I think it's just an adjustment process from a different method of teaching. Of course, I think you should check out Cambridge.

Yeah, a 3.45-3.5 sounds about right for that percentile. It depends on the quality of the programs you're applying to, but as a general guideline, the GPA is only a hurdle to bad applications and a non-factor in good ones. A 3.5 should be good enough for them to continue looking at your profile. It just means that you might be at a slight disadvantage if you apply to, say, Harvard. But it's nothing that can't be overcome by strong research/experience/writing sample/sop/recommendation.

So first of all, what they mean by "all undergrad work" is that you should convert your final marks. Don't worry about the St Andrews system - I can guarantee that no matter where you're applying, you're not the first from across the pond to do so. Second, I'd call it a 3.75: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/Grade%20Conversion%20United%20States.pdf

Steven David, Johns Hopkins. To a lesser extent, there are a few scholars at Yale who would work (personally, I'd say Blattman and Kalyvas). But it depends on what you mean by quant... if constructing a simple model to see the correlation of one thing to another is too quant-heavy for you, you'll be hard-pressed to find anything. I'm in the UK now and even the scholars here do such analysis. Also, civil war is a pretty broad field these days... it really depends on what part of civil war interests you. I see that you mentioned women in civil wars - what specifically?

Just an update: Harvard has officially put up the most annoying application ever created. Chicago's is much better.