natofone

You'll likely have to redo whatever you take now in graduate school. I suggest that you take an applied course on linear regression. It'll help in graduate school because you'll more fully understand what things like regression coefficients, t-scores, and p-values are for your reading seminars. It might improve your chances to get in as well, because I believe that some exposure to statistics is expected.

To those with the GRE behind them, how well did your practice scores predict what you ended up with on the real test?

One of the books mentioned an 'on screen calculator.' No such thing exists, right?

Plisar is correct. As an international applicant, you're expected to have an 800 on quant.

Yes, you should retake it. You'll do much better just by being more familiar with the format and testing environment. The math is very easy once you learn the basic formulas and strategies (pick a number, fill in the answer) involved. The above poster is correct - just get a book and study for a few weeks. You'll be happy with your improvement.

What iPhone app? You can easily learn many more than 20 per week. I was doing 50 a day for a month or two before I took the verbal section. Keep in mind that the vocabulary only takes you so far. I didn't run across a single word that I didn't know the meaning for, but I still only got a 720.

It all depends on how competitive the schools are that you're trying to get into. For non-competitive schools the GRE is a mere formality.

Nobody thinks that you are a dufus or anything like that. This stuff is definitely really hard to figure out and the whole process is extremely competitive. I struck out entirely last time too, so I'm in the same position that you are with trying to figure out what I did wrong, what to do next, how to apply better, etc.

I agree with Jim that you should be reading more to develop a stronger command of political science. You should also try to look into junior faculty or new hires in your area to see what they've been writing (Jason Lyall comes to mind with counter-terrorism). Go here: http://irrumormill.blogspot.com/2007/12 ... redux.html and google the names of people that got interviews/jobs at the higher-ranked schools. Read what they've written so far. This will give you an idea of what types of topics are covered in political science and what methodological approaches are relevant. When you've been able to focus your interests more, then look at the faculty webpages from the top departments and see what everyone is doing. Read their stuff. I've taken the approach of scouring faculty webpages and reading their stuff after completely striking out last year. I now have a fairly decent command of which schools fit the different elements (substantive, regional, and methodological) of my interests. I can clearly see some huge mistakes that I made last year in terms of department fit and statement of purpose.

Yes, MA programs are generally much easier to get into, but you're less likely to get funded.

MA Programs: MIT - http://web.mit.edu/polisci/grad/mastersdegree.html These depend on which subfield you'll be pursuing: Chicago - http://cir.uchicago.edu/ Yale - http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/iac/mainternational.htm#

A great deal, unfortunately. Get a very high GRE score. Consider doing a 1-year MA at a good school to prove your abilities at a top school.

Your resume itself won't really matter that much. It is a small part of the package (and many schools don't accept it). I don't think that anyone will really care one way or another about your volunteer work or internships. Worry about keeping your grades up, nail the GRE, write a good SOP (and really find out what a good one consists of - my mistake last cycle), take a ton of math/stats (if you are doing American), and try to do more research.

The Harris School at Chicago had some good IR scholars. They've lost a bit of their thunder lately, but should rebound. You would also be able to tap into Chicago's political science department. In my opinion, Mearsheimer is one of the best for security in the qualitative mode. http://harrisschool.uchicago.edu/progra ... es/phd.asp I still caution against applying to political science programs if your goal isn't academia. You won't get as much policy in them. Do you have a general familiarity with security literature within political science? It is very theoretical and seems like it would be a huge waste of time if your goal is policy. It will also add years to your education as political science PhD programs take 5-7 years, but public policy PhD programs only take 3-4 years.

Academic political science PhD programs are designed to make academic political scientists. You will not get into any of them if you say that you have plans outside of academia. Public policy phd programs seem more in line with your career goals.

I went to a CC (and then a crappy state school) because of family reasons and ended up getting into Michigan and Chicago for MA programs. You might have problems applying directly to PhD programs. I struck out completely and my only glaring weakness is weak undergraduate reputation. I've been told that GRE scores are very important for people with backgrounds like ours. It can make people look past a community college transcript. Another option would be to first do an MA at a top school and then apply once you've proven yourself.

La Voz - I would consider applying to more schools. It is just tough and you need some luck. The more schools that you apply to increase your chances of an adcom being in a good mood on the day the read your app.

I took this approach and struck out at 13 schools. Next time I'm crafting each one specifically for said school, but with a common structure and common points raised.

No, I've heard that many MA programs are enrolling more students to increase revenues. There should be more spots for MA programs. The PhD front seems bleak.

Yup. Not only more competition, but also fewer spots and less funding. Much more competitive than two years ago would have been.

A good SOP requires research into schools, centers, professors as well as the substantive, regional, and methodological research focuses that you'll highlight.

I applied to 13 last year and struck out entirely. I will apply to 15-17 this year, but distribute them a little lower on the rankings.

SAIS is the public policy program at Johns Hopkins, so not poli sci. Poli sci phd programs are far more competitive than MPP programs. As an example of a target program, UCSD's average for the past three years has been 739-754-753. I'm definitely in that range, but could certainly benefit by jumping a standard deviation above the mean. If you look at the successful candidates here (viewtopic.php?f=48&t=16751), most of them are well above my 730.

I had done a bunch of research on political science programs and had their acceptance rates in a spreadsheet (based upon just looking at the websites of various programs). The numbers were wildly off. For example, petersons lists NYU at 44% acceptance. They now are at 10% (http://politics.as.nyu.edu/object/phd_a ... s_faq.html). About 5-7 years ago they made a ton of great hires and really started to move up in the rankings, so I assume that this 44% was before they got better...so 5-7 years ago.

Oh, I didn't realize that the original poster was taking the Kaplan course diagnostic test, instead of a book test. They are right.