Darth.Vegan

LOL this is such nonsense. So basically, letters, statement of purpose, transcripts, writing sample and CV hold very little weight in the admissions process, at least according to a few people on here. That is complete nonsense, it has to be. Obviously there are items of an application that hold more sway or weight with admissions committees, I think what it really comes down to is that no one on this forum actually knows what they are.

I find it it hilarious that there has probably been a thread like this for every single item of an application (devaluing) with the exception of letters of rec. I really think the speculation can be unhelpful at times. That said, I do think this site has helped me develop stronger applications. Just gotta remember to take advice with a grain of salt.

http://www.grad.wisc.edu/education/academicprograms/profiles/922.pdf

I would look into something more along the lines of AK Press or PM Press. As far as PhD programs, highly unlikely. There are plenty like that, but funding is basically non-existant. Edit: Also, the "top" funded PhD programs are really not having trouble placing students. While you're right in suggesting that the job market is rough, the top programs still do fine. While I doubt the prospects job wise will get much better in the near future, the fact that many top programs are now taking much smaller cohorts with guaranteed funding should ease the pressure for jobs over the next 10 years, at least a little bit.

Ha yeah. I'm 2 down and have 13 to go. Luckily I only need to finish 5 more before graduation.

@Chuck. That is a great advice thanks! I did not apply to any schools that I would not seriously consider attending, including the MA programs I chose to apply to. As you said, I have generally good idea of my competitiveness like many others on here. That said, like many others on here, I have other factors or blips on my application that blur my ability to assess my real competitiveness which caused me to apply wider than I had originally anticipated (including 6! MA programs, hoping for funding). While I feel I am a very strong applicant, 2 years of research experience, 3.94 GPA from my degree granting institution, honors thesis, and extremely enthusiastic letter writers (i.e. telling me that I will get into a very good program), lack of prestige of my undergraduate institution, somewhat lower community college GPA (3.2) and my lackluster quant score give me cause for concern. I am sure I am not the only one on here that feels generally competitive but has concerns about how other parts of their application might be looked at. I would like to go to the best program possible and longterm I hope for the best placement possible, but I don't care if I work in a super prestigious institution, my goal is a tenure-track job, basically anywhere in the US or Canada, and I am hopeful that my program choices will make that possible.

The verbal is fine, I think you'll probably do fine at programs that aren't super quant heavy.

I am applying to a very big range personally, but I am also including MA programs (with a track record of funding). 2 top 10, 2 top 20, 3 top 31, 2 top 60, 2 top 90 (MA programs), + Simon Fraser, Toronto and Victoria (for an MA). I figure I should get 2-4 offers with funding with this wide of a list. If I do get an MA first I will aim higher the next time around with a couple somewhat lower ranked (40's & 50's) thrown in for good measure.

I have a somewhat low quant score too (just below 50th percentile) but a high verbal score (91st percentile) that I hope will balance things out. I also have other factors that I feel make me competitive all around, but I guess we'll see.

Some schools allow you to submit as many as 6 letters, though more than 4 or 5 is probably excessive.

Ok really? You didn't tell us anything else. Do you have any research experience? publications? presentations? strong letters of rec? Can't really tell you anything without that info. But you may want to look into some MA programs as a way to buff up your application for top PhD programs

Usually people say at least a 4 and you're fine, but your scores are awesome otherwise, I wouldn't worry about it. A lot of schools don't even use the AWA.

This person seems like an idiot to put it bluntly. I would look for a letter from someone else.

This is so beyond offensive it's not even funny, you are so inherently bigoted towards "anarchists" there would be no point in even debating this. The only thing I would say is that you should check your assumptions at the door and stop stereotyping folks. It's clear to me that you're a total prestige snob, and frankly that sort of discourse has no place in sociology. Also, you trash Graeber's scholarship and reference his inability to be granted tenure at Yale as proof that he produces lousy research, yet seem to completely ignore the fact that schools like Yale hardly give tenure to anyone the first time around. As has been pointed out here more than once, Stanford (as an example) has not granted tenure in decades.

yawn.

Yawn.

Confuse anarchism for occupy? Tell that to David Graeber. Anyway, there are a number of anarchist sociologists. Check out Richard Day, Bob Torres and Raj Patel to start.

Damn this is hard. You don't even have a split (one high score, one low score). I wouldn't spend a ton of money applying to top 30 programs. It's not impossible, but it's unlikely that you would pass their cut off's. Maybe apply to 2 or 3 top 30 programs and then apply to 6-8 programs between 40-100 in the rankings. You also might want to consider some of the better ranked Canadian programs that don't require GRE scores. Some US schools don't require them, specifically University of Hawai'i does not use GRE scores at all. FYI: the Political Science department at Toronto does not appear to require GRE scores.

I think the issue is when potential applicants stress their desire to be teachers. The goal of most top programs is to produce scholars that will get jobs at research universities and publish in their field. I think a lot of us see the value in teaching, but the sad fact is, being a professor is largely not about teaching, even though that is a large part of what we will do. Of course the exception is teaching colleges (e.g. liberal arts schools), but top programs don't generally aim for placing their students in these types of schools.

absolutely true. I mention that I earned the opportunity to teach an intro seminar in my SOP because it is pretty unique, but made sure to emphasize research, research, research.

I hate these things, but from what I understand, they can only help your application not hurt it for the most part. I am just focusing on my trials and tribulations working towards academic excellence, my non-traditional status and my how my activist experience inspired my passion for my field.

If you can, try and have one of your letter writers address this for you. I don't think you should waste space on this in your SOP.

Same problem here. I got a 5 on the ETS score it now! practice, but only got a 4 on the actual test. I'm not sure it was faulty grading or the fact that I got flustered a bit by my first question and ran out of time while typing. Good luck on the challenge. If you can get it changed to a 4 or 4.5 you should be fine!

That sounds great to me. I have a friend who works in the english department at my school and she just got her PhD from UPenn. She used a similar setup for hers and was very successful. She only had a couple sentences about the department and faculty she wanted to work with. While fit is the most important part of an SOP IMO, I firmly believe that how you describe your potential research areas helps the committee determine fit more effectively than you telling them how x professor fits into your research. I do include that kind of thing in my SOP, but not more than 1 paragraph for the entire program.

Good luck! Just make sure you score very high in verbal to compensate!