Alext182

This was a great idea - if you login to fastlane, click "view fellowship status details/request fellowship status change" the screen shows you the stipend for each year. For 2014, it shows $34k.

This may step on some toes, but it has never been clear to me why people that know they want to attend a phd program earn a terminal masters. I am at a top program and about half of our students never earned a masters. Instead of attending a masters that requires relocating your family and either taking out loans or attending a less prestigious program, I'd think about how you could spend the next year strengthening your application. If you were waitlisted at Penn, your application is already competitive. If you took a year to improve your application (whether that means improving your GRE scores, maybe presenting a paper at a conference, developing a better writing sample/application essay) you might be accepted into one of your ideal programs next year. That would save you a lot of time and money. I know that its easier to do something related to academia - I was in a similar situation but chose to get a "real" job and strengthen my application in my spare time. It paid off and now I am glad I didn't get a terminal masters. Put another way, unless you think one of these terminal masters will make you a much better researcher (which in turn will make you more competitive in the future) I wouldn't go to either.

For what its worth, my letter writers weren't "stars", my math score was about 65%, I went to a community college and state school, and I was still accepted into Madison, Wisconsin, UNC, etc. I think I was successful because my application demonstrated a passion for research and a clear vision of what I wanted to study and how I would succeed in their program (e.g. which professors I would work with). re: Test scores: If you can raise your score to around the 65th percentile I think it wouldn't be a huge flag. It would probably give a school pause, but I think your experience and verbal score could overcome it. When the committee is reviewing your application, you just want to be sure that your application gives them the tools to make a strong case for why you will succeed (e.g. "yes her quant score is low, but her verbal is high, she has experience designing research plans, collecting qualitative data, and disseminating research; she is clearly committed to conducting research and will be likely to finish the program, etc). re: Letters: I wouldn't worry at all about the prestige of your letter writers. A well written letter from someone reputable is worth more than a letter from a star who doesn't know the applicant well. Instead, I'd focus on whether or not the person has the experience necessary to judge whether you will succeed in the graduate program. Ideally, your application would have people that can assess your research plans, ability to conduct research, and ability to meet your goals. From what you described, i'd choose a sociology professor to write a letter because your application would be stronger with one letter writer from inside the field. Last word of advice - because it sounds like you are switching fields and won't have top test scores, I'd focus on developing a really strong writing sample and personal statement. On gradcafe, I think students tend to compare things that easily quantifiable (test scores, under grad institution, prestige of letter writers, etc). But really, I think those are the necessary but insufficient components (you need your test scores past a threshold, you need a good GPA, you need solid letters of rec). What the committee is most interested in is whether you will finish the program and earn a job. The best way to show them that you will do those things is by writing essays that demonstrate an understanding of how you could contribute to the field and why you are a great fit to work with their faculty.

This is slightly outdated but I am not sure if someone has updated this data. In 2010, ASA (the main sociology organization in the US) compared what specialty job postings were looking for with what phd candidates were selecting as their areas of interest. They did this to look as possible mismatches between what universities are hiring for and what phd students are specializing in. Page 7 here has the data: http://www.asanet.org/research/Moving_Toward_Change_2010_Job_Bank_Survey.pdf Politics was one of the worst specialties in terms of having more students than jobs. However, it was tied as the second highest advertised specialty. So jobs are probably out there, they just have a lot of competition.

re: number of students admitted I'm at a top program and visited several programs ranked between 1 - 20. I know that my program has a number in their head of how many students they want their average cohort to have (about 12). But they know that based on previous years, about 70% accept. So to get about 12 students they admit more like 17. If most accept, we have a large cohort (e.g. 15 instead of 12)- so to balance it out next year they aim to have a cohort of 10. So they might only admit like 14 that year. If fewer than 12 accept, they start using the wait list. I think this is the norm - its not they've extended so many admittances that they'd have to rescind them if everyone accepted, but at the same time, its not like they are counting on every student accepting. Programs know what percentage of students usually accept their offer and plan around that. I think the exception would be programs that wouldn't be able to fund their students if too many accepted, in which case the ceiling of how many students would be lower (although again, I think it would mean that if they are aiming for 12 they accept 14). Based on how some of have described it, it seems that its being alluded that a program such as mine that wants 12 students would accept 12 and then have a wait list. And that if someone in the 12 turns it down someone from the wait list moves up. But I don't think that is how it works for most programs (or at least from what i've seen at top programs). For one thing, it would be unrealistic for a program to think that all of their admitted students are going to enroll - and they would prefer not to rely on a waitlist which is hard on students and can hurt relationships with the student. For another, doing it this way would really complicate visitation weekends (e.g. would they just invite admitted students? And then count on wait listed students accepting their offer without visiting the school?). My advice to waitlisted students would be to just write a professional email to the grad advisor. Be polite but firm that you are very interested in attending their program if you are offered admittance but are considering other offers. Then ask them a couple of questions to clarify when you should expect to hear back from them and whether in their experience someone in your position is likely to move off the waitlist.

Setting aside your interactions with other students at program 1, how did you get along with the professors you would want to work with? If you do not believe you would enjoy working with the profs, I would not consider program 1. If you liked the faculty but not the students, that is a tougher call. Another consideration is how you liked the potential incoming cohort of students at program 1. If you didn't like the current students, but did like some of the incoming students, I wouldn't write it off. You will spend the most time with other students in your cohort and some of the things that you didn't like might change as new students come into the program. At my program, each of the cohorts seems to have a different vibe/mini-culture. So i'd recommend trying to nail down what you didn't like - and whether that is based on interactions with faculty, a handful of current students, or if you think it is something pervasive that is not going to change.

IMO the main benefit of going elsewhere is networking - during your Phd program you will have people at your program looking out for you but you still also have your undergrad contacts should you need them for social networking or if you want to continue collaborating with someone. By attending the same program, you limit the number of profs you can work alongside and the number of profs rooting for you to succeed. On the other hand, if its the best fit its the best fit. Those are the two considerations i'd weigh: networking vs fit

I was accepted into about 7 programs ranked somewhere between 2 - 50. Stipends varied from about 15k - 28k. Some of the variance had to to with cost of living (e.g. Bloomington was on the low end whereas UPenn was on the high end). Medical insurance was included. Some programs explain their stipend on their website. So I'd try looking into a few programs you might apply to if you want more specific information. If you live frugally (mainly having room mates) I think it is doable.

I had a similar situation in that I was accepted to several great programs. I wouldn't try to negotiate the base stipend (I don't think programs will change that for a single student plus to compare programs you would also have to take into account different costs of living, etc). Negotiating fellowships, however, is fair game in my experience. Thus, you would not say - program x offered me a stipend of this, can you match it? But you could say - program x offered me a fellowship in which I would not have to TA or RA for the first two years. I am attracted to this package because it would allow me more time to develop my research. Does your program have any similar opportunities?" Most programs have a graduate dean or director that you would contact. It is really important to handle it with tact - always try to bring it back to your research - not quality of life stuff (e.g. spending money). And reiterate how interested you are in the program. I'd probably run the email by a mentor if you can before sending it. Last word of advice - only negotiate with a program that if they match what you are asking for, you will attend. Asking for a program to boost their offer, waiting to hear back from them, and then saying "no" if they offer it would look unprofessional IMO.

I think the rule you are referring to is only in regards to federal fellowships. From the 2013 NSF GRFP regulations: "Starting with the 2011 Fellows forward, GRFP Fellowships cannot be concurrently accepted or combined with another Federal Fellowship, irrespective of the Fellow’s Status." As the Ford fellowships are not federal, I believe that students can use their NSF reserve years to hold a Ford fellowship. Unless you or anybody else has more info?

Last year I was lucky enough to win an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship during the first year of my graduate studies. I am thinking about applying for a Ford Predoctoral Fellowship this year (my program is 7 years so I could feasibly use the NSF for 3 years and the Ford fellowship for the other 3). Does anybody have any experience applying for the Ford fellowship with an NSF GRFP? I am wondering if it will help or hurt my application. Thanks!

I was feeling anxious in general and wanted to see if the person I talked to would let slip any additional information. When I called their number (Phone: 866-NSF-GRFP ( 866-673-4737 ) ) they informed me that disqualifications have already been sent. She also offered to check on the status of my application and said that there were no "flags" on my application and to expect the award decision email in early April. If you are concerned, i'd recommend calling as it literally only took a few minutes.

I visited top programs like UNC Chapel Hill, UW Madison, UPenn, and Indiana-Bloomington. I honestly found that top programs such as these tried to have well rounded cohorts--often with different demographics, research interests, academic backgrounds, etc. I was 24 and considered young. Programs put a lot of value into students that take time off and work. Rather than seeing you as less committed, they often think that you must really want to do this to leave a career behind. I wouldn't overthink it. And if you can think about using your work experience to inform your research interests, it would strengthen your application.

@arrowtotheknee - Broadly speaking, fields that focus on the relationship between social institutions and individuals typically differ from the STEM fields, because they are more abstract and less focused on finding THE solution (eg sociology, political science, communications, etc). For example, scholars in these fields are less likely to conclude their studies with concrete solutions to the problems they may study, such as inequality. I am not having difficulty defining my broader impacts, rather, I am having trouble identifying what the standards are for social sciences. The numerous examples I have found are typically related to creating/identifying solutions related to scientific problems (eg diseases, environmental problems, city infrastructure, computer programming flaws). These STEM studies make up the bulk of the awards, as they should, but I find it odd that it is difficult to find examples of social science winners online. Thanks for the advice. I've found examples online, contacting past winners, and my university.

Has anyone found essay examples for fields within the social sciences? I ask because it seems that the Broader Impacts of social science research is typically more abstract than research in the STEM fields. If any previous award winners from the social sciences read this, please feel free to PM me if you prefer. And thank you to the posters about the most efficient way to do references.

Thanks, I'm just trying to kill time by overanalyzing...really all that is relevant is that decisions should be coming relatively soon. Good luck with the rest of your apps, must be nice already having an offer in the bag (from a top program no less)!

Congrats on the acceptance! Did you have any contact with prospective faculty before you submitted your application? It looks like last year acceptances from UNC spanned about 10 days and I'm wondering if there is any rhyme or reason behind it.

Dan I personal messaged you.

I took a few years off after graduating with a BA at 21. But I haven't attended a graduate program yet. I'm excited about visiting the program and seeing Atlanta. Just curious about the "interview" process. And I wasn't expecting to hear anything until early February. Now I'm anxious to hear from other programs but I'm trying to forget about it for the next few weeks.

This morning I received an invite to visit Emory's program. Did anybody else? I'm trying to gauge how good my chances are of beig admitted. I guess their interviews can be stressful. Anybody have any more info besides past posts?

Hey Everyone, I'm applying to most of the top 10 programs in Sociology. I'm wonder what the GRE scores are of other students applying to top programs. My score was higher than I anticipated and i'm wondering if that has happened to other students. My scores were: Verbal: 164 = 94 Percentile = 670 Old Scale Quant: 153 = 65 Percentile = 680 Old Scale (didn't finish a section which ruined the score) On the old scale this score is high enough not to be red flag to most programs. But i'm wondering if the scores will be inflated this year. Additionally, I co-authored a published paper in a top Communications journal, co-authored an unpublished paper, and was awarded two national fellowships while writing my own paper (which is my writing sample). I have a BA with a 3.96 GPA and 3 letters from professors who know me extremely well. Not to be pompous, because i'm actually surprised to be applying to top programs, but what are the credentials of some other students striving to get into top Sociology programs?

I actually attended UNT as an undergrad and did quite well (two national fellowships). UNT's sociology program is unranked which is an obstacle. Recently, there has been a focus on hiring more prestigious and qualified faculty, such as Gabe Ignatow from Stanford, who is very approachable and enjoys working with graduate students. If you went there, you would have to publish a lot to overcome going to an unranked school but it is do-able. Still, i'd try and find a school that is ranked for both programs if you and your boyfriend have the credentials to get in. If you get serious about applying there, i'd definitely make sure there is faculty there he would like to work with. He would have to publish to do well.