lambspam

Definitely apply to places you would want to go, and don't apply anywhere you wouldn't actually attend, but have safeties. Several of them. It's been really shocking to see how many people applied to all top-tier schools with no mid-range options. Grad school admissions season is vicious and expensive, and you don't want to throw away $1000 (and your time and emotional energy) on a round of unsuccessful applications. Roll RIght, voice of eternal wisdom, is right on the money.

In undergrad, I majored in political science with minors in sociology and history. My master's is in sociology. Of five sociology Ph.D. programs, I've gotten into two so far, been rejected from one, and am pretty confident about the last two (they're Canadian, so they notify very late in the game).

I'm wrapping a master's program and just finished application season. I found the master's program enormously useful in that it provided the opportunities to: - Gain research experience in a number of subfields - Make strong, personal connections with faculty who were able to write very good, detailed LORs (they could speak to my research skills, personal attributes, and strengths) - Strengthen self-motivation and independent working skills before pursuing a longer program - Prepare a fantastic writing sample (I used an article I wrote for a grad class) - Learn quantitative and survey methodology, statistical packages, bibliographic databases, all that stuff (which told me a lot about what kind of research I enjoy doing) - Attend conferences - Get published and present my work - Develop a research proposal for Ph.D. apps that was feasible and interesting It helped me grow enormously as a scholar. The master's program also helped me decide that I wanted to spend my career conducting research before I committed for the next six years of my life. As far as getting into Ph.D. programs, it helped with every aspect of the application and allowed me to develop a really solid CV. I learned what grad school was all about and was much more confident when applying for my doctorate. I have no doubt that the work I did for my master's is what got me into some awesome top-20 programs and great international universities. That said, it's not for everyone. Some people are lucky enough to have gotten this kind of experience in undergrad or are certain about their research path. Plus, it can be hard to get funding for a master's program. Worked well for me, though.

My understanding (though I may be wrong) is that it's hard to get a tenure-track position in a U.S. sociology department with a Ph.D. from outside North America. Can anyone else around here speak to this?

Why is it that Canadian programs seem to take so long to get back to applicants? I haven't heard back from either University of Toronto or York University, and it's nearly April. Frankly, I think they're screwing themselves out of some really strong applicants by sending out admission notifications so late. By April or May, a lot of candidates have already accepted other offers or have at least gotten emotionally invested in other programs. Anyone know what's up with Canadian schools' timelines? (For the record, though, McGill did an awesome job of replying in a timely manner. They were extremely friendly and professional, to boot.)

You're not alone in your struggles with verbosity. Brevity has waged a heavy-handed battle against many social scientists, myself included. But when it comes to your proposed research topic, just pick one and then talk about how you'll tackle it. Much of your SOP is preservable, especially since you're a very engaging writer. The problem is that you talk about so many things that you sound like you're all over the place. In my experience as a masters student, grad school is all about zooming in on one microscopic issue, using a very specific method for figuring out what it means, and then moving on to the next microscopic issue. Having broad interests is great, but we'll have our whole careers to save the world. Don't have to do it all in one paper. Meanwhile, brag a little more. It can be hard, but there are ways of doing it without sounding like an asshole (which was my biggest fear). I was able to do this by talking about how I was "fortunate to have the opportunity" to work with certain professors, do certain kinds of research, publish, etc. Doing so makes people sound like they're doing great things and still aware that they didn't get there without a little help. You can also use your SOP to weave everything in your CV together. You were a teacher, you speak Chinese, you're interested in stratification: what's the common thread? Another thing that works, if done carefully, is to talk about a time you didn't succeed and how that shaped you. Your teaching experience could be a great opportunity for this -- and a good hook. Just make sure you get a few pairs of eyes on it before submission to ensure that it doesn't come off wrong. I'd be happy to send you my SOP if you'd like. I got into some really great programs after spending a lot of time figuring out how to tackle a lot of the same issues you're talking about (word count, lots of interests, focus, connecting the CV to the SOP, being uneasy about bragging, etc.). Just let me know.

Hey there bubawizwam, You're a very engaging writer, so most of the suggestions I have regarding your SOP pertain to content rather than style. I hope this doesn't come off too harsh -- you sound like you'd make a fantastic graduate student, and there are a few things I think you can do differently to convey that better. - Your statement is way too long. All the schools to which I applied had limits of one page, and two of them had applicants keep it to 500 words. Yours is 3.5 pages, single-spaced. Even if schools left the page limit open-ended, that's still far too much. - While your hook is interesting, it is too long and ultimately doesn't say much about you personally. It's mostly about James. I recommend limiting it to five sentences or fewer and using it to make a strong first impression about what you've done. - You spend a lot of space describing the negative conditions of American schools and programs aimed at correcting them, citing data, studies, and standards. There's too much of this, especially because it doesn't say much about you. - More active voice. Statements like "data can be gleaned through meta-analysis" aren't powerful. "I will conduct a meta-analysis of ..." is stronger. - You don't really say much about their program at all. You say "I believe that UMD-CP will help me become a true student of sociology -- a field researcher, a statistician ... " etc., but you don't specifically state why Maryland stands out. Any sociology graduate program will teach you how to conduct research. What is it about Maryland/Stanford/UT-Austin that does it for you? For example, I really liked that one of my schools has a very strong record of graduate students co-authoring with faculty, and I'd like to get in on that. - You don't mention any professors that you may want to work with. This is a really vital component of a successful application. Know who's there, who you may want to work with, what kind of research they're doing, and whether they might be willing to work with you. If no one can (or wants to) supervise your project, you can't do it there and won't get in. Contacting faculty and then mentioning them in your application materials is not pushy. It shows that you know their department. - Ultimately, I think the biggest challenge with your SOP is that it sounds unfocused. You essentially propose three separate research projects, and that's just too much if you ever want to actually finish your Ph.D. Your best bet to a successful application is to focus focus focus. Just pick one and run with that. Once you're in grad school, you're not tied to that project. You can tweak it in small and large ways. Hell, you can throw it out and start all over, and the grad committee knows this might happen. In the SOP, they just want to see that you are capable of identifying an interesting research question and developing a solid methodological approach. Anyway, that's what I suggest. Good luck!

I completely agree with this entire post. I didn't rock the GRE, but I got into some great programs because of my SOP, research experience, CV, and fit. Though I may be alone in this, I don't think schools really give much weight to GREs as long as they're past the 1200 mark. Anything far above that is just bonus. I strongly recommend checking out Donald Asher's Graduate Admissions Essays: Write Your Way into the Graduate School of Your Choice. It provided invaluable advice on securing top-notch LORs, making great contacts, and writing an SOP that made me sound focused and mature but interesting. For help picking out schools in your subfields, you may want to order a copy of ASA's Guide to Graduate Departments (there may be a more recent version). It's like $10 for student members and provides comprehensive information about every sociology grad program in the US, including faculty interests, department specializations, funding, deadlines, contact info, number of grad students, etc. Those two books completely guided me through the application process. According to the latter publication, some strong programs with emphases in both education and crim are UC-Irvine, Emory, NYU, Ohio State, Penn State, and UT-Austin. Those might be some good places to start. If you can, try to get more research experience. Even if you've already graduated, consider talking to a professor about the possibility of helping with a project during your gap year. Even if you didn't get paid (which you probably won't), you'd get a great LOR, some research experience, and a CV booster. You may also find that you really like it. Any opportunities to gain quantitative experience would be a great thing, especially with your research interests. Also, have you considered submitting your UG thesis for publication?

You'd need to include more information about your undergrad and law GPA, GRE scores, and the like. Also note that California has some major budget issues, so unfortunately it can be hard for international students to gain admission and even harder to get funding.

UNC is a fantastic program and Chapel Hill is an absolutely awesome place. It would be hard not to love it. Congrats!

Haha, I bet you do. Just keep on keepin' on. Donald Asher's awesome book, Graduate Admissions Essays: Write Your Way into the Graduate School of Your Choice, has some valuable tips for getting oneself off waitlists. Your university or local public library probably has a copy or two.

I applied and turned down an offer. Hope you get my spot.

I'm declining the offer from McGill. Hard to do because it's a great school and offered generous funding, but there were a few concerns. International student logistics and job availability for my partner were big issues. Really, though, it came down to the fact that I visited another school and it just felt right.

Will anyone be attending the UW recruitment weekend on March 4-5? Just wondering.

Thanks! My primary POI is Jason Carmichael.

Got into McGill. The (incredibly friendly) grad director has the most hardcore name ever -- Dr. Axel Van den Berg.

Got into the University of Washington! Google filtered it to my spam folder. That was a silly surprise.

Virginia Tech: - Solid in crim, gender, Africana studies, health, mental health/SSP, and aging. It can be hard to find committee members if your interests fall into other subfields. - Good mix of quantitative and qualitative. - Faculty gets along well. A lot of the faculty is nearing retirement age, though the department is beginning to bring in some fresh faces as funding starts to open up. - Many professors are interested in publishing and conducting research with grad students. As a second-year, I've gotten more requests than I can possibly accommodate. - Course selection is hit-or-miss. Some semesters there are interesting classes but other semesters are barren. - Cohorts are generally 8-12 students. - Grad students are cordial. Older grad students are more than happy to help out the newbies. Not a competitive vibe at all. - Students haven't been very socially active. There isn't a lot of cohort bonding. - 10 or 20 hrs/week RA/TA work for those who receive funding. That's what's up. If anyone has any questions about Virginia Tech, feel free to send me a message.

I recently downloaded P90X 'cause I'm a big tool. Since I'm a little crippled, I can only do about half an hour at a time. Hard as hell, but it'll make you appreciate oxygen and water much more than you ever thought possible.

That's a good call, I don't know why that didn't occur to met. It almost always comes down to money and sociology never gets very much of it. Not to rant too much, but I've been arguing for a few years now that our programs will get the amount of funding they deserve once sociologists demonstrate to legislators and the public just how relevant and applicable our field is to the real world. Physical scientists have done an awesome job at this and psychology programs are working their way up the chain of respectability. For some reason, though, sociologists as a whole just suck at playing the PR game. I find that sad considering this is the field that should know the most about how resource distribution actually works.

Maybe this is a dumb question, but why is it that sociology programs seem much less likely to conduct admissions interviews than, say, biochemistry programs?