Tufnel

Thanks for the replies. It sounds great. I'm definitely easy-going, so much so that my main concern is whether or not I'll feel tied down by the time cost (dinners, meetings, etc). We'll see. I plan to go to a couple of the dinners at various co-ops to try it out.

RWBG - no hope for NYU?

In what form does one normally receive summer funding? Do you mean funding for research? Opportunities to RA/TA over the summer? I have these grand visions in which I spend summers conducting fieldwork abroad and writing/polishing a paper. In reality, I'm probably going to be collecting data for a prof, right? Also, thanks for hanging around here now that you're in a program.

While there is certainly something to be said for averages, I think expectations vary based on research interests. If you do qually comparative, I think the required Q GRE is lower compared to that for aspiring methodologists. However, you better have lots of time in country and good language ability (which it seems you have). Congrats!

Then you just hit a clutch home run. Well played my friend, your cycle is over.

Yep. For those who didn't read it, I wrote out a long, melodramatic ramble about luck vs. choice. After rereading it, I decided that it wasn't worth reading while sober. Since we can't all kill brain cells together, I decided to save the amateurish tirades for future conferences. I'll buy a round and listen to those of you who go to Rochester rant about regression, then you can listen to incoherent discussions about the philosophy of choice. It'll be great.

I think it's important to realize that none of this matters. At the end of the day, grad school shouldn't define you. At least, I don't think it should. That'd be a terribly narrow and shallow definition. You can be a complete douche and still get a PhD from a great school. You can be a frickin hero and never have a shot at a doctorate. You're no better or worse a person with an acceptance. It's about what you do wherever you find yourself. Life isn't an Olympic event. Edited to add: None of this is to belittle the frustration and disappointment associated with rejection letters. Only that at the end of the day, we're a lot more than students.

There are dozens of ways. Check with your university, past professors, etc. If you have skills and are willing to work for free, you are essentially an additional RA. Many universities have programs that allow students to work with professors, particularly if that school doesn't have a grad program.

Well, if things don't turn around, I'll do what I can. Come this fall, I can definitely be the latter (a contact in a program, that is). Regarding the former, I think it comes down to your strengths and weaknesses. From what I understand, it's not going to do you much good if you have a stellar GPA and good research experience. If you lack the first or both, perhaps it's a good choice. If you only lack research experience, there are better (free) ways to get it. But I say wait a couple weeks. You've only received 50% of your decisions. Let it ride and if it doesn't end well, then regroup. No worries, you'll get there.

I did the same thing, though it was perhaps only 20% of my SOP. In my opinion, it was one of the better decisions I made.

My application is far from perfect. Parts of it are very strong and parts of it are very weak. I saw the SOP as an opportunity to prove that the strong parts reflected my abilities and that the weak parts were aberrations. Plus, I'm a little neurotic.

Hmm. Pulling for ya man.

I'm not answering for Gopher, only giving my own $.02 because I feel well-versed on the schools to which I applied. I started by working backwards from researcher to school. Whose research do I find most interesting and relevant to my own? That left me mainly with big name guys. After the obvious researchers were identified, I tried to identity faculty whose work I had yet to read. I looked through the CVs of all the faculty in my subfield at programs with good placement records. I pulled those with articles that seemed related to my work. Then I read the abstracts to those articles. I filtered out those that weren't actually related. Then I read the complete article if I thought it was indeed tied to my work. While it was quite tedious, I applied well aware of who researches what at each university. In my mind, it was imperative to know fit when crafting the SOP.

Gopher. Sorry man. How about the other 4 (12 - (6 decisions + Princeton/Harvard))?

Also in at UCSD... Girly screaming commences...

Last year, the first batch of Harvard admits came out Thurs and Friday of this week. ........

I just want my rejection from WashU. Come on mailman!

I don't do political psychology but I believe OSU is pretty good. You should, of course, confirm that with someone involved in the area.

Sorry man. Traffic, pollution, absurd COL...You have all sorts of reasons to reject them.

Effin USPS. I don't understand why we still post letters. I'd much prefer an instant email rejection to all this waiting.

I still haven't heard one way or the other from WashU. Anyone else in limbo? I feel like I'm being kept in a "just in case" pile or something. Either that or my file fell in-between the printer and Professor Schofield's desk.

I couldn't agree more. However, the OP does not intend to read all the works necessary in order to be an "expert" on politics prior to the start of grad school. That would be impossible. I didn't read "essential books" to mean "essential for expertise in political science" but instead to mean "essential for competently beginning grad school." And I do hold that Politics is simply not essential for a political economist prior to grad school. I can think of texts and articles in my field that everyone is expected to know. None are more than one century old and the vast majority are less than 50 years old. In my mind, those are more pressing prior to grad school than Machiavelli.

I recognize the desire to read foundational literature. However, it really does depend on your field. If you do political economy, The Republic is never going to be directly relevant to your research. While books like The Prince and Politics certainly help one understand the development of political thought, I would not call them foundational for an understanding of modern political economy. They are good reads and I heartily recommend them but you don't need them. If you want to do some fun reading, by all means, knock that stuff out. If you're trying to make up for an academic record that lacks political science, I recommend going through the syllabi for courses relevant to your area and reading the required and suggested texts. That will get you much farther.

No one claimed the Harvard contact, right? I'd love to know if electronic notification will indeed come this week. It's necessary to determine how much I should freak out. Haha, that's hilarious. I hadn't seen it. Good times.