IRdreams

Signalling wise, micro is widely suggested so likely a good choice.

I'm not an abroad fellow, but I got my stipend on time already.

Hi all, I'm trying to design a poster that I will use to present some formal work I have done. I was wondering if anyone had any good suggestions for online resources that might include poster presentations of game theoretic work in political science. Sadly, my google-foo has failed me.

Because it is fraud. If one knows they only want a masters, they are applying under false pretenses and lying to achieve admissions. Lets continue your banker example: the equivalent of someone pursuing a masters under the guise of a phd is someone who gets hired as a director but is only willing to do an analyst's work. Or lets imagine a lawyer who bills his clients for hours he didn't do...sounds like embezzlement. The PhD program pays you on the good faith assumption that you are actually attempting to finish the higher prestige degree and that they will get a certain level of work out of you. If you violate that good faith it is the academic equivalent of fraud or embezzlement.

To add clarification, I've taken a full year sequence (Game Theory 1 and 2) and am at the reading level so the year abroad would be to take courses at the level above this. Our econ department has a rather famous theorist, but I'm hoping to gain a networking advantage as well as credible skills.

While the vast majority of programs do not include language coursework towards your required course work, you should look for schools that have pots of money lying around to encourage language training abroad. At both my stepsisters and my own university, there are rather generous in department and university wide programs that fund language acquisition during the summer. This money is designed to help you learn a language in a country that speaks the language. Despite the obvious advantages to immersion learning, this approach has an additional advantage: you can learn a language and often begin laying the ground work for actual fieldwork at the same time if you carefully select your language school destination to match your fieldwork interests. Thus these funds act as both training money and pre-dissertation grants.

Another piece of unsolicited advice: make sure you show your personal statement to advisers for helpful criticism. Many of my professors offered to look at what I had wrote. I am frequently afraid that I will be "discovered" to be unqualified if I let people read things like my personal statement and such discovery by someone close to me I imagine would be much worse than faceless committee members. Based on this imposter fear, I did not take my professors up on their very kind offer and this was very foolish of me. When I did my application cycle, I was lucky to be admitted into 3 good programs, but the programs that admitted me had versions of my PS that were the most radically altered because they were less known for methods. Looking back, something I put in the personal statement about methods that went to more quantitative schools would have been stricken by my advisers if I had just let them look at my drafts and I may have made a stronger showing at those schools. There is no guarantee of course. But professors know their field better than any applicant so really do take advantage of their experience and wisdom when attempting to speak to their peers.

Focus on the projects that have taught you something relevant to the research you are proposing. The previous research experience essay is not about giving them your CV. It is about telling how you have worked to completion on things and demonstrated that you have picked up useful skills along the way. It should thus be part of the narrative for your proposed research. Something like: "My work on X will be applicable to my proposed research for the following reasons." This is all about producing a consistent narrative which demonstrates your competency and professionalism. If you still are unable to pair the down, chose those projects which either demonstrate the largest success or were most recent so you have better letter writers also speaking about how you were awesome at that project and thus will kick ass in grad school.

So I think it is really hard to give advice based on the limited information you've provided here. Grad school is a confusing process and an actual conversation with faculty at your school would likely be able to draw out more about you and how it relates to which programs are a good fit for you if any. I would schedule a meeting with your major adviser as well as at least one or two other faculty members in political science whom you respect and who know you to talk about your hopes for the future and what type of program best meets them. I believe that this should be your first step since you seem overall not that informed about what the different types of programs do and what sort of careers they cater to.

So we have an ex-sociologist in our program, so I think they are somewhat amenable. You might have the best luck targeting schools that already have a commitment to a sociological approach to political science. In IPE, this means schools with a strong constructivist contingent There are some schools that are even focused on constructivist IPE (Corenll). Economics is trickier and the success had with that major entering polisci can vary a lot depending on the nature of the econ major. If your version was quite math intensive, this should help. If you do not have a solid number of math courses though, I imagine the econ major will help less. Gary King published an aritcle on Harvard's admission process a number of years ago, and he basically said any strong indication of math skills is what they were looking for. He argues that mathematics ability and intelligence are highly correlated and figures that those with a solid math background can be taught anything else. I don't know that I hold entirely with this view. However, there is evidence of a number of math majors making it big within this field currently as well as historically. For example, James Marrow and several other game theorists. If you have actual math to back up the econ and polisci game theory work, this could be appealing at Stanford and Rochester. From the sound of your research question, it seems more sociologically motivated. Have you looked into economic sociology as subfield of sociology at all? I gather that economic sociology has been having a resurgence of late and your background would be uniquely qualified for programs of this nature I would imagine.

That being said, if you really only want a masters and not a phd, you should not use of the slot of someone who is commited to the phd as a point of ethics.

My mom took me to her chem lab when I was a toddler. Though I am not a scientist, I still associate that concrete chemical smell with warm fuzzies. Also, stable removers great snake toys.

barn owl

Scuttlebutt is that it refers to new loans taken out specifically for graduate study. I've been told that it will not effect the fact that some of my undergrad loans are subsidized and in deferment. What I don't know is how this affects graduate loans made before the switch. My bet is that it does not impact these loans as when you sign a primsory note you are basically signing a contract.

See I really disagree with the advice that has been given here about applying to top 20. When I decided to apply to graduate school, I knew I wanted to work in IR and thought I wanted to work on interventions. Professors told me just apply to all the top programs and see where they let you in. Their reasoning: the job market is rather bleak when you start contemplating school 25 and below. Also, grad admission tends to be a bit capricious so you aren't sure where you'll get lucky. Another reason which I've since come to believe: class work in graduate school can be transformative; there is little guarantee that what you go in substantively interested in you will still want to work on 6mo later. This is especially true since most undergraduate polisci courses are not focused on the sorts of questions future academics ask, therefore assuming that the questions you find compelling will not change as you transition from undergrad to grad might not be justified. One of the ironies of grad school is that this type of transformation can even occur when you get in to a school you thought was a perfect fit. I wound up at a very qualitative school but am now most interested in EITM research. Maybe this reflects a lack of research on my part, but I suspect not as I have heard this story from many students and faculty a like. Graduate school has a professionalization component because it is hard to figure out on your own the full outline of the field and how to best maximize your place within it. This suggests that while research might mitigate some aspects, the fact that we need to be taught how to be professional political scientists and not just substantive issues implies getting the tenor of the field as an undergrad would be quite difficult on average. Now, I probably would tailor your list to be a top 15 subfield specific, but I wouldn't trim much beyond that.

Huffington Post discusses this here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/01/graduate-students-debt-deal_n_915525.html

blind corners

I'm a huge defender of liberal arts education. I went to a SLAC and it was one of the best experiences of my life to date. I also think a utilitarian view of education really misses the point. But then again, my class background also gives me that luxury. However, I disagree with the assertion that if universities didn't offer LA they would be trade schools. I spent time at Oxford where students take classes for 3 years only and all of their classes are tightly focused on their "major." Would you consider this university a trade school? That being said, I do see a strong trend towards turning our larger universities in the US into trade schools. This is true even at schools with a well developed backcore. I think the issue is the increasing prevalence and popularity of pre-professional majors. At my school, we had none of these and yet people were still deemed well qualified for med school and ibanking but also got to experience 4 years of their life dedicate to enriching the mind. In the end, I don't think the presence of a backcore is enough to arrest the trend towards trade school in our universities. I think the bigger issue is that pre-professional degrees undermine the ideals upon which university culture was founded and has flourished for the last several centuries. And it is has been this undermining of this culture which has lessened the value of degrees in so called "useless" humanities that were before well regarded.

So the reason I say that it is potentially an addition is because one never knows how the vagaries of journal editors. The odds of publication obviously go way up, but still no guarantees.

We had a nickname for Foucault when I did debate that I think he earned largely due to his inability to write something that translate well into english: fuc*o. Every time I pick up one his books I wind up feeling illiterate. I had problems learning to read when I was a child so this still an emotionally difficult thing to deal with.

So I would say send your strongest piece of political science writing that demonstrates original research. Make sure if it is a class paper then that it be a seminar style class paper. Best yet is to send a chapter out of a senior thesis. This is good for a couple of reasons. If you are applying to grad school, your thesis demonstrates commitment to a longer and original research project. You can usually tell a more convincing story about how what you want to work on in grad school extends from the work in the thesis. The fact that it is a big project demonstrates your commitment to the research process which is generally a long term commitment. You also usually developed some research skills during the thesis so you can highlight those skills in your SOP and your writing sample then backs up the claims made in the SOP creating a cohesive package.

Thanks guys!

I'm computer illiterate so please excuse the question, but how do you get the yourname.com website to forward to the location where you website is actually hosted?

One other thing about R+R that my DGS said: apparently not all R+Rs are created equal. When you get your memo from the editor explaining the R+R, you should carefully read it for the tone. If it looks like they are strongly encouraging you to revise and resubmit (they may even use "We at the Journal of _________ strongly encourage you to resubmit..") than you like have something like a 75% chance of it being accepted if you make the necessary changes. If however, the memo merely mentions that resubmitting is a possibility I've been told that this more like a 25% chance acceptance if you make the changes. Also, I've seen research though I don't feel like going citation hunting that notes that while top journals have an acceptance rate of 10-20% the actual rate for acceptance of scholars in different stages of their academic careers is obviously very different. One of the ones I read noted that in my field that Senior faculty were successful 75% in publishing an article, Juniors something around 50 and grad students were substantially lower (10-25%). This finding shouldn't be surprising as hopefully we learn something about playing the game as we move up the career ladder, but it is probably helpful to remember when you get your first reject. It's not you; it just that grad students get this result much more often as we're all learning. Sometimes I find reminding myself that rejection is the modal response useful. I also remember reading a great article on how to deal with rejection in PS which is a journal APSA puts out on giving advice to polisci peeps. http://www.politicalscience.uncc.edu/gbweeks/Facing%20Failure.pdf

home loan