Jump to content

Kendra Smith

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kendra Smith

  1. It said, "You are one of 12 highly talented students who we hope to enroll in our program this coming autumn." I interpreted that as the target enrollment, not the number accepted to reach that enrollment.
  2. That's great, but that's not how "admission rates" work.
  3. polisci12345--thanks for your input. I am a little confused though. If these Americanists had not taken analysis and were not comfortable with mathematical proofs, how would they do formal theory or take courses in the economics department?
  4. Thanks for your reply--to clear up something that I was ambiguous about, when I said that I was not interested in theory, I meant normative political theory/philosophy (although it is clear from my post that I am not a fan of positive political theory either).
  5. I graduated from a top liberal arts college with a double-major in economics and political science. Upon graduation, I went to work for an economic consulting firm, deciding that I wanted to move away from the private sector and submitted applications to study economics in graduate school. I achieved admission to a top program on the strength of my recommendations and grades. However, upon arriving at school, I was shocked by the level of mathematical training and ability that is required in graduate level economics (the burden of which grows heavier every year, I understand), and that despite my excellent performance in the undergraduate-level courses and on the GRE (I graduated in the top 2% of my class, and scored 800 on the math section and 700 on the verbal), there was no way that I was going to get through what actually felt like a Ph.D. in physics or mathematics, especially without an undergraduate major in math and perhaps a couple of graduate courses as well (and frankly, I have to admit that I am not exceptional at writing mathematical proofs nor do I enjoy it particularly much, a disposition that I discovered the hard way is fundamentally incompatible with graduate school in economics). Confident that I was going to fail out, I voluntarily withdrew during the first semester. The reasons, then, that I am considering studying political science instead are as follows: 1. It was my other undergraduate major, precisely because it was one of the two things that I found most interesting, 2. In contrast to what I saw in grad-level economics, I hope that there would be more of an opportunity to focus on substantive issues in political science, and 3. While I understand it is a difficult and grueling path, I would like to have an academic career, with a think tank/DC career being an acceptable fallback if academia did not work out. I certainly understand that I would need to take some methods courses, but I expressly am not interested in, say, developing new statistical methods. Overall I wish to combine qualitative work with a regression or a little time series or probit here or there--if all of American politics is actually about who can do the fanciest math or the trendiest new Bayesian analysis or the most innovative formal models, then I think that this would be the wrong discipline for me. My main concern, then, is that with a substantive interest in American politics but not theory, the mathematical demands of today's political science Ph.D. programs would also be excessively onerous. At econ grad school, for example, there were poli sci Ph.D. students (who I believe were Americanists) in my Ph.D. microeconomic theory course with me. I am not totally incapable of math--I got As in Calculus I and II and Linear Algebra, and I am willing and able to take courses in applied statistics--I got As in each of intermediate and upper-level econometrics in undergrad. However, if ever again I had to take anything approaching the econ Ph.D. courses, it would just not be workable. In seeking advice out about applying to economics programs, Ph.D. after Ph.D. I talked to vastly underestimated what I would be up against and even seemed sanguine about the fact that I hadn't taken calculus-based statistics or real analysis (the latter of which I did eventually do, albeit a not so rigorous summer course at a local public university), so I am almost shell-shocked and terrified of another seeming bait-and-switch--I don't want to head off somewhere intending to study politics only to find myself struggling to prove that the eigenvalue decomposition of something is some other unintelligible thing. I am wondering, then, if I am right even to be considering applying for such programs, or whether, even deep into the poli sci rankings, American politics is just mathematical proofs and hardcore econometric theory all the way. Then, assuming that I should apply, what should I say to convince graduate schools that I am not going to abandon them or fail required methods courses, given my previously abandoned Ph.D.?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use