mwash

This is a thread between political scientists about whether political science legitimately counts as science. I doubt that there are any senators reading along, so there is no reason to dumb down the language if it means addressing this issue in a less rigorous way.

It's fitting that you mention Iraq. In the lead-up to war, a number of prominent realists, including Ken Waltz, John Mearsheimer, and Stephen Walt, warned that war with Iraq would be a serious mistake. Their beliefs were rooted in theory, broad qualitative empirical research, and case studies on Iraq. This "non-scientific" approach led to two generalizable and falsifiable claims: first, that sadistic leaders like Saddam could be deterred, and second, that offshore balancing is a promising strategy. Consider the money, human lives, and international legitimacy that our government would have saved if it listened to these IR scholars. It would be enough to compensate for the $9 million we get per year from the NSF, I would say. Of course, not all political science is done correctly, and there are very problematic qualitative studies that do not lead to sound policy prescriptions. But that is why political scientists need more funding from the NSF, so that we can arrive at more precise, empirically verified conclusions and train graduate students with the best scientific tools to conduct their qualitative and quantitative research.

Since when has qualitative, theoretical, and historical (empirical) work been unscientific?

yeah i find these rankings a little questionable. i have a hard time believing that chicago isn't a top 10 program.

I'm going to Berkeley.

i'd make that my second paragraph and simplify the language a little. i think in your first paragraph you should say what field you're interested in, mention why you want a PhD or MA, and then complement their school

congratulations man! great program. i'm nd but i've always loved that school too

wait jackassjim have you decided on michigan?

What's your subfield?

UCSD

Unwinding

Thanks for the advice. I think I'm leaning that way right now. But I was also wondering what factors are motivating your decisions. Maybe I should add to the list: preference of significant other, climate, and common interests with other grad students or professors.

For those trying to decide between schools in the top 10 or 15, what factors do you think are the most important: prestige, job placement, fit, quality of education, size of stipend, quality of life...? How are you making your decision and why?

Has anyone heard from MIT today, or should I count myself out?

Yeah I was expecting them to shell out money like Berkeley did.

Those were the terms.

You got a better deal than me. TA all five years First year: $20,818 2-5: $16,637

UCSD is an excellent school. I'm seriously considering going there right now, and I think that they offer the combination of a great education plus an excellent quality of life that none of the schools on your list could match. Regarding your general point about prestige, I really think that what matters more in this process is the relationships your professors have with people at other universities. Although my stats weren't quite what yours were, my rec writers knew people at Chicago and Duke, and that's what I think really gave me an edge at those places. The admissions committees are more likely to take the risk of hiring you if they have someone they know and trust backing you up.

Congrats! How did you find out?

Whoever got the Fed-Ex from MIT: What area of the country do you live in?

Does anyone have inside info on Harvard? I thought they were notifying yesterday.

Quick question: are stipends taxed, and if so, what percent does the government usually take?

Yes this board is great! I've been reading it for about a month now and its been very helpful. Jimcompx, your view Is pretty consistent with my own research so far, except for Chicago going constructivist. And adaptations, I will PM you, thanks. Also, aren't there some new rankings coming out soon?

I researched their programs when I applied, but in terms of prestige, job-placement, and quality of education, I really don't know much. Lately I've been looking at rankings and talking with professors, but I get a lot of mixed feedback. Just wanted the opinions of some of the veterans on this board. And I am basically a realist.

They sent me an e-mail about an hour ago. I don't know much about any of these schools though. Maybe you all can help me out. I do theories of IR and security, so is Chicago the best choice for me at this point?