balderdash

Brilliantly accurate observations. The awkwardness of the weekend is akin to that half-beat where you sort-of recognize someone but can't place him or her. You feel out of sorts but believe the solution is right there, just beyond grasp. The problem is that with this it lasts for 64 hours.

Congrats, ohsnap. I take it that it was TAMU? I'll try to answer, in rambling fashion. It's a complicated question. First, you should know that you can't be truly prepared. Getting a rejection hurts, and it will do so no matter how much you warm yourself up to it. That said, it's a lot like getting rejections for college, if you can remember what that felt like. The stakes are higher, but the sensation is the same. And you need to know that you will get rejected. Many, many times. So with this in mind, to answer the question practically, I think the best you can do is to not focus on it, because ultimately it is now out of your hands. Instead of biting your nails, try to manage the stress of waiting. Personally, I try for self-enrichment. I've been watching classic films (8 1/2, La Notte, Terence Malick's filmography), reading pretty widely (P G Wodehouse, Bertrand Russell, stuff within my field such as the new Will Reno book), and indulging in a lot of hobbies (following the GOP horserace, NFL playoffs, nights out at the pub). The goal is twofold: productivity and sanity. You have to balance pleasure with work, but since your attention span shortens, its good to always have a lot of activities queued up so you never get bored. Besides, you really only have 2-3 weeks until you know whether or not you're rejected. Soon there will be ~4 notifications of acceptance on the board for a school to which you've applied. If you don't get a call/email from that school within, say, 36 hours, you're almost guaranteed to have been rejected. Once it starts, it's a whirlwind two weeks as you process the knowledge that you won't be going to Research University or Prestigious State School.

What program was this? At least I have the (NFL) playoffs to help me through the month... and with hockey and basketball seasons in full swing, there's always something to zone out to whilst worrying about silly things like getting a graduate degree and a career.

In case others are awaiting confirmation: Madison emailed today to say that my application was complete.

I think what Zahar meant was: a PhD has very, very little value to anyone who doesn't intend on using it to teach at a college or university. The skills it imparts are inapplicable to most professions, and the time commitment makes it a poor investment if its something that's you'd like to do just to increase your profile vis-a-vis, say, consultancy jobs, or just out of personal interest. If you intend to teach political science/public policy, though, by all means pursue it. I think orst has very ably given you a brief introduction. I would also check out some blogs that discuss such issues. Here are two examples, one from Chris Blattman and another from Dan Drezner.

it was this way last year as well.

Well, fair enough. But I'm not attempting a dissertation on the subject; I was just reacting to a very, very off-base post, hence the "in no way." Mea culpa.

Well, this has been debated and such many times, but two quick reasons: 1. The GRE is timed. Real-life academic work is checked and re-checked many times, by many eyes, stretching over months. 2. The GRE quant analysis is mostly algebra and geometry. These are hardly useful when one is trying to answer, for instance, "does ethnic fragmentation increase electoral violence?" or the like. There are many people who dominate the GRE-Q but would be absolutely lost doing quant analysis - I'm one of them - and vice-versa.

Scoring poorly on the GRE quant is in no way an indication of one's quantitative ability in general - especially when you're talking about regression analysis and such.

For development people, The Anti-Politics Machine, James Ferguson, and Civil War is Not a Stupid Thing, Chris Cramer. For Africanists, I don't think Herbst is the way to go... one would be better off with work from Clapham, Bayart, Sklar, Lonsdale, Beinart, Crawford Young, and Lemarchand. Of course there are many, many others, and each region has its own group of experts, but that would be a good start.

Yeah, I wasn't pulling out my hair or anything but it certainly got worrisome. In any case, all set now. Thanks for the concern.

Cornell just contacted me about my application. It had been showing "incomplete" back in November, a few weeks after I submitted everything to them, so I emailed and was told to wait until mid-December. Today they finally confirmed it was complete. Sheesh. I feel bad for the administrators who are that backed up...

Probably true. Lurkers generally turn to regular posters in early January, no? By the way, any Africanists out there keeping track of what's going on in Nigeria?

It's a hurdle. Anything 700+ should be fine, 750+ optimal but 650+ won't kill you anywhere but the very top programs. Just do the best you can and let the rest of your application speak for you.

From what I've heard, you can try sending the grad admissions secretary - not director - an email with the relevant information. Sometimes they'll add it, sometimes they won't. And congratulations.

Actually, thought the same thing until I looked back to last year's thread. As of a few days ago, we were ahead by about 20 posts, year-over-year. So it seems that you and I are thinking back to early February activity and applying it to what is a typically quiet December.

Happy holidays, everyone. Today is one month until the first results should start trickling in, as Stanford has led the way for the last few years in late January. It's crazy to think the waiting has passed this quickly.

I just know that when I worked in undergrad admissions, we always took the highest scores - "we always want to see the candidate in his or her best light." No idea on whether that holds for grad admissions, though.

Haha, this was me last year. Ironically, having the worst happen has made me more chilled out this year... but we'll see what happens in late January. - How often do you check the status of your applications? Once a week at most, for now. Last year: twice daily. - How often do you go on grad cafe? Twice a day now. Last year: every couple of hours. - What is the craziest thing you have done or written in preparation for these applications (i.e. spelling mistakes in SOPs? Hilarious personal statement teasers? Nagging emails to letter writers?) Called one school probably 50 times last year to try to get my decision... - Do you check other people's "what are my chances" posts because you want to help or because you want to know how competitive you are with them? Both. - Have you ever responded to a "help me with my _____" post and then slightly regretted giving someone else an edge? Nope. Doctoral poli sci programs are intensely competitive, and ridiculously specific - there'd have to be someone with my EXACT interests competing at the same school, which is unlikely.

I suppose, but it seems a bit silly, right? Their application checklist was easily the best last year - a simple list of all the things needed, and a check next to those received - and it has to be the worst this year. Puzzling. But it's good to hear it looks the same for you. By the way, February 1st is 7 weeks from today. Generally that's right around the time that acceptances start coming out. Hard to believe it's less than 50 days away.

Does anyone know what's up with the Princeton status check? It has the message: Then underneath, a whoooole lot of boxes for each item. For me, I have "RECEIVED DATE:" followed by, for instance, 2011-10-28, but then "GAO RECEIVED DATE:" with nothing next to it. This is the case for all materials, even things like recommendations (which they confirm they have received). So the "note" means that if it says "GAO RECEIVED DATE," they have it? (And not that there will be a date listed next to it?) You would think the answer is yes, and that it's simply poor interface design. But then, on items that I clearly have not sent in - ie, music sample - it says "RECEIVED DATE:" next to "GAO RECEIVED DATE," just without any numbers in the first box. So if it hasn't been received, then why does it have the GAO message? Sorry for the really confusing post, but there's no easy way to explain it. I could do a screenshot and such, but that might be a bit too involved. If anyone else has applied this year and could enlighten me, I'd appreciate the help.

I can back this up too. I know someone who left a comparative politics program after the first year because it was so methods-based.

It's a lot to do with the Oxford-Cambridge rivalry. As a Tab, of course I'm biased, but I do have many friends at both institutions. Cambridge's program is much bigger (70 MPhil students as opposed to 15 at Oxford) but also much more diverse, with greater provision for historical, sociological, institutional, and political specializations (as opposed to economic, legal, or aid-based work that sort of dominates the Ox program). Now, if we are talking Politics more widely, and Social Sciences at its broadest, then you're spot-on in that both are generally thought of as Oxford's specialization, as opposed to STEM work at Cambridge. But even then, it is wrong to say that either is "not held in high regard" in its "weak" area. Both are extremely well regarded the world over, irrespective of academic specialization, and it's only within the cozy Oxbridge College Common Rooms that such distinctions are debated. I worked for DFID for a while. Of the 20 or so people in my department, there were 4 Cantabs and 0 Oxons. Anecdotal to be sure, but from what I heard, it wasn't out of the ordinary.

Factually incorrect.