aecp

How sweet! Miss Favor wants to do you a favor!

How did you know to check the website?

What happened to your confident self? Stop it!

Please NO negativity allowed...!

Don't lose hope!

There is a new posting of admission to FSU. Zudei is that you? They admitted someone on Jan 23 and then there is the new post from today, February 2, 2014. Why the intervening period between admission decisions?

I love your spirit! Your would-be-adviser better fight to get you in!!!

Hi! You sound cryptic, were your letter writers contacted by any of the schools you applied to? Care to share with us, what you mean? Feel free to send a PM if you wish. All the best!

Hello IRToni! What's your research interest? What's your subfield? Political Theory

Thanks for sharing. Care to share more....Your message is very cryptic. Thanks!

I fully agree. Too many egos in academia. An abundance of quirky norms known only to insiders.

Sorry! Cautiously optimistic, I lumped you in the mix, erroneously. You were the sagacious peacemaker. Please forgive me. Please do not go away!

I HEREBY DECLARE TIMEOUT!! Take a walk, a nap and come back with love. Thank you.

A hearty congrats. Very surprised you did not get into Wisconsin. Does Wisconsin even have China specialists? Delighted you got into Duke!

RWBG, THANK YOU again from me! I echo IR IR IR PhD's sentiments.

Sorry, it seems our posts crossed. Thanks for the additional info!

Thanks for answering my questions. The process is even far more competitive than some of us imagined. Two more points/questions, please: 1. The selection of two committee members to review the file does introduce an element of randomness into the process, does it not? 2. It would be great, I think, to have procedures for tie breakers e.g. bringing in a third member to review the file if both members cannot both agree to admit or not to admit i.e one votes for admit and one votes not to admit.

RWBG, Thank you so very much for sharing this. It's good to have this kind of "color" , so Ithank you immensely and look forward to more information from you when you are able to. One point and two questions, if I may: Point: You said "All that is to say that even if two committee members really liked your application and thought you were good enough to enter the program, there is about a 75% chance we won't be able to make you an offer." This is an incredible statistic. Simply incredible! Questions: 1. Please clarify: to proceed to round two, must the application be recommended by BOTH (of the committee members) that review the file or just at least one of the two members who review the file? Edit: Re-reading the post, it seems clear that the requirement is for both members to recommend admission. I guess I was hesitant to accept this strict selection criterion. Do you have any procedures for tie breakers e.g. bringing in a third member to review the file if both members cannot both agree to admit or not to admit i.e one votes for admit and one votes not to admit. 2. Prior to the initial round of screening by two committee members is there an initial pre-screening round where some candidates are eliminated by GPA, GRE or other factors. If so, what are those initial screening factors. Once again, a hearty thank you to you and best wishes in all your pursuits. Edit: The selection of two committee members to review the file does introduce an element of randomness into the process, does it not?

How did you remove it?

You are hilarious! Thanks for the laughs on a day I needed it.

Hello B-squared! Just curious, were you interviewed? If so, how did it go? What were you asked? This could help others in the future. Thanks.

Is it a good thing that the economists are successfully imperializing political science with their "quantitative reasoning and formal* theorizing"? * abstract and unrealistic

I think you have a wonderful profile! How could you convince yourself you would not be accepted. I see many more admissions for you. Please keep us apprised of your progress. Congratulations once again!

Thank you!

Thanks for the reply.