balderdash
-
Posts
571 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by balderdash
-
-
I would also add University of Essex as a top master's program in the UK. They are ranked 1st in research and they seem to have a stronger quant focus - which might be a plus if you consider to go back to the U.S. for a Ph.D.
Sorry, too right. I meant Essex, not Exeter.
-
Balderdash, I appreciate your points about warm ups and confidence. I definitely didn't mean to imply that any less care be taken early on in the test. Once you have found a rhythm to your pacing that works for you it is certainly good to stick with it. I just hoped to explain the CAT format to any readers who might not be as familiar and might be having trouble finishing the test in a timely manner. We know from our years of test prep experience that the front-loading misconception is prevalent, and many students who study with us, both for the GRE and GMAT, come to their first class believing that first questions are more important, with the last questions being less important or even mostly irrelevant. We endeavor to make sure that people understand that questions are important all the way through, which is why we have taken care to look at all of the ETS research on the subject when developing our curriculum. If you are interested in hearing more about our approach to CATs we would love to invite you to one of our free previews should you fidn yourself in New York City; the CAT format is discussed in great detail there. You can find more information on our website, which you can reach through my signature. Thank you.
I appreciate the intent.
[by the way, not that I'm a mod or anything suchlike, but they don't like proprietary posts on the forum. I know that's not what you're doing, but you will probably want to be careful that your posts can't be construed as such.]
-
Hi all. I am considering applying to US Phd programs as well as some UK master ones in political theory this autumn. I wonder what the differences between the 2-year Mphil degree and the 1-year Msc degree are, like levels of competition of getting in, the rate of succesful reapplication to US PhD programs upon completion, etc. So if anyone happens to know something, please share on this forum and I am sure there are some others who need to know. Thanks very much!
Yuke, I have a lot of info, so I'm going to throw a lot at you.
First, check out www.thestudentroom.co.uk , specifically the postgraduate section. It's a UK website, so there's a lot of Oxbridge stuff.
Second, consider Cambridge. I applied to both (and the MSc at LSE) for the MPhil in a related field. I got waitlisted then rejected at Oxford (the cads) but accepted at LSE and Cambridge, and the latter is where I'll be going this year. Admittedly, Oxford's department is superior for my field, but it's also a year longer and more expensive. For Politics, however, most consider Cambridge's department to be superior, and to my knowledge their degrees are only one year as well. I would check out what they have to offer.
Third, the difference between the MSc and the MPhil is that the MPhil is generally considered a higher degree, similar to an ABD (all-but-dissertation) level grad student. For instance, I think it's Columbia's PhD program that awards the MA after 2 years, the MPhil after 4, then the PhD after 5-6. At Oxbridge, MPhils are more individual research based as opposed to the MSc being coursework/exam/essay based. So it's really up to you to decide which is more in tune with your interests, though given that you're looking at PhD programs, I would suspect the MPhil is where you want to be. However, obviously both are fantastic degrees to have from well-respected universities.
As for admissions information at Oxbridge - expect about 1/4 to get in. That seems really high (25%!) because of what we're used to in the USA, but I think that the UK applicant pool is just as competitive because though there are fewer apps, the quality is more consistently high (ie no clunkers apply). If you apply broadly - Oxbridge, LSE, UCL, KCL, Exeter - you'll stand a good chance of getting into at least one or two. They love US applicants because we pay easily triple what home students pay, which helps in the recession.
Finally, chances for application to US PhD programs. I was somewhat surprised when a Yale professor told me via email that they receive quite a few Oxbridge MAs applying, so one still needs to distinguish oneself with good recommendations and good research. That makes sense, obviously, but I think it would certainly improve an application substantially - just as any solid research or work experience would.
Hope it helps.
-
A word of warning to everyone on this thread, the first questions of the GRE are NOT actually more important than the later questions.
I mean, I appreciate the effort you've expended, but I'm fully aware about how CAT works. So are the people who write Princeton Review and Kaplan, and both counsel spending more time at the front than the back. No offense, but I'm going with what they say.
Also, you're ignoring other beneficial effects of spending more time on the front. Usually, you have to warm up and take your time at the beginning to get your brain working, even if you're mid-test. Also, getting a few answers solidly right to start the test boosts your confidence and helps you with the rest.
So I'll keep my "misconception," thanks.
-
After being accepted to SAIS for an MA International Studies, I spoke with one of the deans because I wanted to know what to expect with regard to my peers' ages. I was informed that students were typically 27-29 years old.
-
Unfortunately, I don't know the landscape of masters programs that well, so I'm not sure I can help you find the right program. As for the GPA question, I don't think I would highlight the 3.1 vs. 2.7, unless the application specifically asks for "in major" GPA. I could be wrong on this, but I am not sure the difference between 3.1 and 2.7 is really worth highlighting.
I disagree. A lot of programs will have minimum requirements or recommendations, and the 3.1 might clear what the 2.7 won't. Further, it's the difference between a B- and (rounding) a B. It's also about a 15% increase over the 2.7... wouldn't you like to add 15% to your GPA?
On the resume/CV, put both. On the online forms where it asks for GPA, put CGPA.
-
I know the feeling. This is my third round of grad school applications. I have to admit, I am pretty excited to get started
Second round here. Hoo-ah!
Chicago is going up Sept 8th, and Columbia will be up in October (but it's really annoying - you can create an account and all, but the app isn't there).
-
First of all, I don't know how well ranked 73% is in the Indian system, and without GRE or anything else it's hard to look at your academic background.
Even then, I am no expert but I'm inclined to say HKS and Princeton are going to be out of your reach. They're simply amazing schools with really difficult admissions processes. Your story could be pretty compelling if you get it into a well-crafted, tight personal statement, so you probably have a good chance at LSE, Sciences Po, and Geneva. I don't know enough about Berlin to comment on it.
But it's always worth finding out with HKS/WW. What's it going to cost, a couple hundred dollars?
So based on my work ex, life experiences and academics , i am targeting the following schools . Is it impossible to make a shift to IR/policy with an engineering degree?
1, Graduate Institute , Geneva
2. LSE ( MPA course , since IR course strictly had acad degree from social science, eco, pol sci)
3. Harvard Kennedy MPP focus on International and Global Affairs
4. Woodrow Wilson , Princeton
I am also looking at Sciences Po, Hertie School , Berlin .
Am i targeting too high ?
-
One more specialization/concentration distinction request:
ID vs Social Policy.
I'm interested in China's social policies, and social consequences of its development policies. I'm fine with working on US domestic social policies as well, but ultimately I'd like to specialize/research on China.
My understanding is that ID deals with poverty alleviation, sustainable development, urban vs. rural growth, etc; while social policy is more domestic oriented.
Given that, I'm not sure if I should go with ID from the start or Social Policy and then do a comparative study or apply it to my region of interest...seems to me that the first option is more viable/appropriate for me, but I'd like to hear your opinions as well.
Well, I'm sure narius will come back and give a much better explanation than I can (like with last time), but I'll start us off:
First, there's no real need to declare one area and stick to it without ever touching related work... I mean, I know all the PhD apps require me to submit a concentration, but it's not as though it's static, unbending, and completely divorced from other subjects. Most, in fact, require expertise in at least 2 subfields to graduate with the degree. So I wouldn't build up these distinctions so quickly.
Also, development is really, really broad. The subject as you described it is probably how European programs are set up and how the policy world works. When I was at DFID, it was a lot of focus on poverty reduction/rural growth. But US academic programs in development really can be much broader. For instance, I'm applying to Yale, whose faculty has a really strong base in conflict and development - Blattman's work is on child soldiering in the LRA, Kalyvas studies civilian violence, and Wood looks at sexual violence as a weapon of war. So it is definitely development, but nothing to do with what you mentioned. So would that type of program fit your interest? Perhaps. If there is someone on the faculty who teaches Chinese development, then almost definitely (and there are a Lot of people who study Chinese dev nowadays). It's all about finding the faculty that approximates your interests, and then finding your own way.
-
But at the highest levels of the test .... and you of all people (I remember your combined score) ought to know this: there are subtleties that a test-taker simply must know in order to get the top score.
For example, just for giggles, I took Powerprep II online the other day ... ETS's introduction to the "new" Aug 2011 GRE ... and discovered to my chagrin that I did not know the difference between "laconic" and "taciturn" ...
(It was all for naught as it turns out. Powerprep II only gives a RANGE of scores: I scored 690-790 on both tests. A hundred point range on each test ... that's the difference between Harvard-Princeton-Yale and most of the fifty state universities. )
That's a good point. I guess I specified my advice for time-effectiveness given that the OP only has one week to better the score. I think when I took the exam I had exactly one question where I said "wow, I'm glad I studied that word and learned its nuances" (for 'sybarite'), so there's a lot of effort expended to pick up only a bit of nuance that may or may not appear.
But you're still right.
-
Neither. Learn the strategies to understand the questions and tricks for answering them first and foremost. That's 80% of doing well on the GRE.
That said, if you feel 100% comfortable with all of that, I'd say learn the words that you half-know ("What does lambaste mean again? I always forget...") because you're unlikely to commit a completely new idea to memory. You can, however, solidify the shaky in such a short time frame.
-
I have no idea if my approach will work better or not. But a friend told me that the most important thing (after concentrating very carefully to be sure you get the first 6 or 7 questions right!) is to look for some "back door" into the problem.
To be more strategic about it, every question has a particular way of being solved that must be drawn from a discrete set of fields (ie, algebraic equations, geometry, etc). So the key is to look at the question and first understand what bit of knowledge the question is testing. When you approach it from the perspective of the test itself, you can get a grasp of what equation, set of rules, or skill is required. Once you get that sorted, you know what you have to do and it's just a matter of executing.
Also, remember that the first half of the section is much more important than the second half. Thus, budget your time but stack it toward the front end: don't be afraid to spend 3 minutes on each of the first few questions, but by midway through the test it should get shorter and shorter.
-
Thanks Rachaelski.
I was hoping to concentrate on borders, security, remittances, or transnationalism. I'm not too interested in Latin American Studies, but I will look into the program. Geography seems to be the most encompassing discipline that I have found so far, but I wanted to see if there were any other programs that I was overlooking.
I would look at programs in straight political science with a focus on those issues. Also, if you're open to degrees in the UK, there are quite a lot of degrees that would be relevant. I'm about to do an MPhil in Development Studies, and some of the courses are on migration. LSE and Oxford both (to my knowledge) offer MSc Forced Migration degrees. So there's always that (and those degrees are cheaper than similar master's in the US).
-
I would still apply... if anything, the department knows you and your work, and that should help your application. Spending a year to do the Master's will only show that you're more prepared than the average leaving-undergraduate-institution applicant. The absolute worst case is that you finish the year and are rejected for next year's PhD admissions. But if you didn't get in when they know you and you have the extra training of the MA, then you probably wouldn't have been accepted without the MA. If you get in, then you've only spent one year out, you have better preparation, and it may have helped you get in.
-
I would focus on three things:
1. Since it sounds like you have one more year of studying at the undergraduate level, I would make every effort to build relationships with professors. You'll probably need 3 who can write solid recommendations for you, so you really need to go out of your way to get to know them. By the same token, look at the requirements for applying to programs - if there is a 20 page writing sample, work over the next two years to make sure you have a great paper that you can use.
2. Make sure the year between finishing this degree and applying in 2012 is spent doing something worthwhile and relevant to your area of study. An internship or something in information security would work.
3. I don't want to offend you, and I admire anybody who speaks more than one language well, but it sounds like your English skills could use improving. My undergraduate institution is well-known for engineering and the sciences, and the applications from India and East Asia were overwhelming. Any student who couldn't hold a political conversation about the news (for example) didn't really interest those departments because they had so many similar applicants who could. So I would say that over the next two years, do everything you can to spend some time in the UK, Australia, South Africa, or the US to get some language immersion. It would also look great on the application (that you're outgoing, like to challenge yourself, et cetera).
-
GPA-wise, mine is about 16.53/20. Scaled to an x/4 scale, it'd be about 3.3. Not stellar. It's mostly dragged down by my Arabic grades (I consistently gt 10 or 12 every year), because my grammar is abysmal.
I don't really know much, but I did want to say that if you're talking about a 16.53/20 as in the French grading scale (where Gods get 20, Professors get 19, and Grad Students get 18, as the joke goes), than a 16.53 would be much higher. I'm good friends with some Parisians and Sciences Po grad students, and they speak as though a 17 gets a commendation from the school. If that's true, and that's your grading system, than you'd be up at like a 3.7, which is very solid indeed.
-
Basically International Affairs is a pretty broad scope. The fields seem to blur. For example, whats' the difference between:
- Economics and Development?
- Diplomacy/Strategic studies and Security/Military stuff?
- Communication and Journalism/media?
The ones that seem clear cut are something like Health, or the Environment.
Also seems the fields within IR don't all prepare one for the same thing, which I guess is natural.
What are your thoughts on this?
Well, they're pretty different areas. Economics in IR could be reworking the Bretton Woods system, trying to bring down tariffs, studying international monetary flows, transnational labor markets, et cetera. Development such as the work I'm doing can be about civil wars, regional politics, and genocides as hindering development. That's a pretty substantial difference. Other development people focus on human rights, agriculture, gender issues, health crises, refugees, legal systems, democratization... I mean, it's really a ton of issues outside development economics.
Diplomacy and strategic studies is a complement to security studies, and although I'm no expert in this field, I would hazard a guess that the former is about incentives and bartering, two-level games and trade-offs. It probably focuses on international organizations and laws. The latter is, I would imagine, US- or Eurocentric (depending on the school) and primarily concerned with unilateral goals. The main focus is probably security and protecting interests abroad as opposed to multilateral and global objectives that diplomacy is focused on.
Finally, communication and journalism are a bit more nuanced, but the idea is the same as with the other two distinctions above.
-
Honestly, I think it's tough to say without knowing:
1. The quality of your undergraduate institution.
2. The quality of the work experience.
Providing that both are good, then I think you'll get into 2 or 3 of those. The GPA is low but can be overcome with the few years of professional experience. The problem is, if your work experience isn't directly relevant or if it's just support work or something, then it won't really go to bat for you.
-
When I applied last time around, I think I applied to 17-18 schools. I had three professors provide all of my recommendations, and although I know they weren't big fans of doing LORs, nobody complained about how many schools I applied to. I also made sure to give them a nice thank you card/present after the ordeal, which may actually payoff since I'll be asking one of them to do it all over again this year.
Absolutely true... I found that my Jamaican professor enjoyed a really nice bottle of rum (the Ron Zacapa 23, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Zacapa_Centenario ) and I gave another one a nice bottle of champagne. Looks like it's a good thing I did that since I'm now applying for PhDs and they've agreed to write letters again.
-
Darn it! I tried to one-up this post and clicked on the wrong button. Could someone neutralise that? Thanks!
Yeah, I took care of that, no worries. I actually thought "who would neg this? It's so true!" and then laughed out loud when I saw your post.
-
Balderdash... you a little excited to get started?
I'm holding off on starting looking at applications until next month, but then again, I've already been through this so have a bit of a head start. Good luck.Well I start a really intense one-year MPhil on October 1, and on September 1 I move to a new country and see my girlfriend for the first time in 3 months. So I don't think I'll be too keen to work on it much during September and early October.
I also made the excel spreadsheet, and most of my documents are ready to go. Good luck to you all as well!
-
Well, I'm sure I'll be corrected, but this seems to be the first school to put up the 2011 application. Is anyone else working on it?
-
Yeah, I'm interested in the 4.02 thing as well...
And what developing country are you in right now/what NGO are you working for? Sorry for being nosy, I'm just an Africanist and former employee of a major government donor so I'm curious.
-
To succeed you really do need to publish. I am not sure if you need to publish while in grad school. I am just starting but from what I have heard there are competing camps on this issue. I have spent some time trying to publish an article, it is a lot harder than you would think... I would check out www.publishnotperish.org which has a really great set of articles on publishing in journals.
Thanks for the resource, I clicked through the entire thing last night and found it pretty enlightening.
International Relations Rankings
in Political Science Forum
Posted
Foreign Policy Association top 10 is a bit different... for instance, I don't know anyone who wouldn't put SAIS in there.
http://www.fpa.org/info-url4715/info-url_list_more.htm?attrib_id=12902&doc_category_id=1127