XiPeepee

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad Institution: American public Major(s)/Minor(s): BA in Political Science, BS in MathUndergrad GPA: 3.92Type of Grad: NAGrad GPA: NAGRE: 169Q, 161V, 5.0AW Any Special Courses: 7 Graduate Courses: 2 Method, 3 Theory, 2 master courses (1 substance and 1 method); also tons of math and technical courses because of my major and interests. Letters of Recommendation: All 3 from tenured professors. Two are from professors whose subfields align with my research interests in my statement and who are prominent names in the fields. Of the two, I took several graduate courses and had frequent interactions (discussing course materials, research interests and suggestions, job rec, politics and current events generally) with one in and outside classrooms, and I was an RA with the other for almost my entire undergrad. I was told by POIs that both professors claimed I was one of their best students to have ever taught and they could attest to both my substantive understandings and technical skills. Although the third is not in my intended subfield, I took several undergrad and grad courses with them and had frequent interactions in and outside classrooms, and they could vow for my analytical and technical skills. Teaching/Research Experience: I was a TA/grader/tutor for several math courses. I also had two RAships. Other: I am an international. RESULTS: Acceptances: Princeton, Berkeley, UCSD, NYU, WUSTL, Emory, UWashingtonRejections: Harvard, Stanford, Yale, MIT, Michigan, Columbia, UCLA, Duke, Chicago, Caltech, Northwestern KelloggLESSONS LEARNED: 1. SOP! SOP! SOP! By the time you are seriously looking at this forum and getting ready to apply, SOP is likely the only thing you can control. And it is the most important component. Make ample time for it. I started in the summer (though I also put it aside for quite a while). Keep editing it like your life depends on it. Make it letter perfect. No need for fancy literary genius or overly specific jargons (broadly used terms within a big subfield maybe ok). Make sure the names of schools, programs and POIs are correct. I revised my draft countless times, with probably 4-5 major revisions, and finally put it to bed the night before I started submitting my applications. Towards the end, I was nagging over one word or one sentence, but that should be your dedications. Get your professors to look at it. If you are fortunate enough, get them to go over it line by line, word by word (I was fortunate enough to have one such advisor), and provide edit suggestions. Send them your drafts 2-3 times after major revisions. Also get grad students (if you know any) and your friends to read them. Although grad students might not be experienced enough to judge what's a good SOP, they might be a better source to go over word choice, clarity, and other details that your professors didn't have time or energy for. 2. SOP structure (this is of course mine. So do modify it as it fits your profile. But I think the overall structure is pretty standard) Paragraph one: Intro a broad research interest/question with some motivations (normative/past work experience + gaps in literatures). Make explicit the subfield and school you are applying to. Do be BRIEF here (probably not exceeding a dozen lines). The intro is important to make the adcom want to keep reading. One professor relay to me that they would read the intro, and if it is promising, they would keep reading, and keep iterating this for each paragraph; otherwise they would toss it. This is from one professor, of course, so take it with a grain of salt. The goal is to make it to the short list that all adcom members (or at least all those in charge of your subfields) will then read together. Paragraph two and three: research questions and interests. These should be elaborations of your broad question posted in the intro. They may include why you want to pursue these questions (or rather, why these questions are worth pursuing? Any gap in the literatures that you think need to be addressed and can be addressed by your research? Any methodological innovations that can help bring new insights to these issues?) The common advice is not to be too broad or too narrow (the former signaling you don't know much about what you want to do; the latter limiting your "fit" with the department). This is of course hard to adjudicate. But it is a good thing to keep in mine as you talk with your professors and revise your draft. You can ask yourself questions such as will people studying different regions be interested in reading this? For mine, I noted a gap between two broad literatures, and proposed to study one particular sets of institutions that may contribute to filling this gap. In paragraph two, I used one sentence to note examples of previous works done by scholars, and used the majority of the paragraph to lay out my theoretical proposal. In paragraph three, I mostly added more possible empirical research and methods related to the theoretical motivations in paragraph two. I did this because I had both theoretical and empirical interests, and, to a lesser degree, to echo my past training in theory as well as substance. So adjust accordingly. For example, this might not be the best format if you are doing, say, ethnography and field works rather than formal modeling. Paragraph four: substantive qualifications. Lay out what you have done previously that make you capable of answering those questions. These can be your job experiences from which you gained substantive familiarity with a particular issue (e.g. security, financial risk, media, etc.); classes (especially grad courses) in which you learned about related topics; RA experiences related to your interests. Even if you have trainings not directly related to your field, show it in a positive light. For example, even though my subfields of interests are not theory, I leverage my trainings in theory to show my theoretical understanding and analytical skills. Paragraph Five: technical skills. My exact words from my advisors are don't be shy; brag about yourself. If you have a quant-focused major, make it explicit, even though they can see it on your transcript and resume/CV. If you have taken a bunch of math/econometric/stat/computation/quant/method classes, highlight the overall topics (for example, time-series stat). If you know some computational & data tools, write out. You should also showcase your relevant projects and RA experiences. Tell them what you did. If you were a grader/TA for some technical courses, also let them know. Again all of these stuff may well appear in your transcript and resume/CV, but it is the SOP that adcom read evaluate more carefully. So brag, brag brag. Paragraph Six: state professors that you want to work with. Best to write down 3-5 professors, with each sentence highlighting why and how that one or two professor's research interests/past works/method expertise may fit with your agenda. Here is a strategic advice. We all know that we probably won't do exactly what we wrote on SOP; in fact, many don't do what they said they were interested in at all (and it is best to have some interests generally aside from what you wrote). But nonetheless, you should be able to write out why the POIs fit with whatever you said your research interests were in the previous paragraphs. After you get into the program, you might still have other professors you want to work with (and in fact, professors whom I didn't mention in my SOP or who are not even in my subfields of interests reached out to me after admission). The point is not to be deceptive, but to make your profile consistent and focused. 3. Don't show too much political/normative stuff in your resume/CV/SOP, etc. I am sure given that we are studying PoliSci, most of us will be interested in these stuff and have done something related. But you don't want the adcom to think that you are motivated by normative values to attend grad school. You should rather try your best to signal you have great potentials to be a good scholar. Even if you are Sheldon Cooper-from-the-Big-Bang-Theory-type of person (whom I adore and would love to befriend), you don't need to show your fun/quirky sides until after they have committed hundreds of thousands of dollars to you. 4. Please don't request lukewarm letters. It is completely pointless and hurts your chance. Talk to your letter writer and make sure that they can write you a GOOD letter, if not great. 5. Unfortunately, the trend is that quant matters more and more, at least in many departments. So unless you are doing totally informal theory, history-type things, having at least some baseline quant/math backgrounds help a great deal. That may mean taking some math/method/quant/econometric courses; having quant-related internships/projects/RA; scoring well on GRE quant section. This is unfortunate, and you might not like it, but it is the reality. 6. Echoing @zoooxu, it is immensely helpful to have a friend who's also applying, if possible. I was fortunate to have one such great friend who's also applying for PoliSci, even though we have different subfield interests and took vastly different courses. We helped each other get through some tough times throughout the process (and in fact, throughout our entire undergrad career), and it was a long, dreadful, and difficult process that required lots of time and energy on top of everything else you are doing in life. Ask them to help you refine your SOP and writing sample, study for GRE together, share resources/intel/advice from professors and grad students each of you know, and reciprocate. If that's the case for you, be grateful that you are fortunate to have such a good friend, because you will be in the same academic circle for years to come, and it is difficult to find someone to read your writings in details once everything gets rolling. 7. You will be checking the forum and the result page and refresh your email a gazillion times every minute after you submitted your applications. And you will most likely be stressed and anxious as you see others get into schools you didn't even bother to apply. It's inevitable. It happens to all of us. Stay patient. Try your best to do something else, which is difficult, and the decisions will come eventually. One thing you shouldn't do though is to check the application portals. Nothing is gonna happen there. If you are admitted, DGS/POI will maybe email you before the portal is update; sometimes acceptances were updated on portals first, and you will get an automatic email anyway. In any case, no need to check the portals until you have got an email, a waste on your internet bill. 8. No need to expect results in January either. Shoot for the start of Feb for things to get rolling. 9. As you can see from my results, there is a significant amount of luck. I got offers from some top-ranked schools while other lower ranked ones rejected me. As iterated by others, it depends on a variety of factors that nobody can control. For example, it's related to who happen to be on the adcom that year. Some professors you are interested may be leaving and you don't know it, so your profile could be a "bad fit." Some may want to adjust their student composition depending on the research interests of students admitted in the past years. Some may have unexpected budget constraint (Harvard, smh). In any case, after you have done all you could to assemble an incredible application package, luck plays a huge part. So don't take it personally (you probably will anyway, as did I, but it needs to be said). Apply broadly (only to the schools that you think you will actually attend of course; five years is a long long time). 10. Grad school isn't everything. There are many things in life worth pursuing even if you don't end up where you want to be. I didn't end up where I want to be for undergrad, but it paved the way for my grad school application with the professors I met and friends I made. Same logic works for grad school applications. 11. Good luck!!!!

Do you happen to know if they have finished sending out acceptance or if they do it over a couple of days.

Anyone claiming another Stanford?

Anyone claiming the lone Stanford acceptance?

Has anyone received any info on the Emory visit day? The only thing I have gotten is just date but no RSVP or any other info.

I just cannot figure out how to formally decline the offer from UWashington after sending an email. Anyone knows how to do it in the system?

I didn't upload my result but I was accepted. Emailed to check portal.

So I just received an email from NYU asking me to provide them with my final official transcript with conferred degree. It said they need it in order to process my application but nothing about admission decision. Given the late stage of application review we are in, can we speculate that this might possibly be a foreshadowing of an acceptance? Otherwise, I guess they could've just rejected me outright for incomplete documents? Anyone else on the same boat?

Has any Emory admit received funding info yet? They said they would send out the formal acceptance and funding package yesterday but I haven't got anything from them.

So I guess at this point for Duke, no news is bad news?

Where did you hear this timeline?