Jwnich1

Political scientists talking about.... current events in politics? ... shocking!! This entire election season has been so strange, that I'm sort of just sitting back waiting to see how it turns out.

I would say get the fundamentals down. At the least cover 2 semesters worth of calc (basic differentiation and integration, taylor series etc. Nothing too fancy there), some linear algebra, some basic stats (linear regression!) etc. Which of these is better if you only have one course? probably any of the basics you have never touched. (if you have seen calculus before, take linear algebra if you havent). My view is that you can always relearn something faster when you need to, than learn something entirely new. For the most part, you will take the more complex stuff once you get in to PhD programs. Most programs with the exception of perhaps the MOST quant - rigorous, know that poli sci training (at the BA level, and MA to some degree I'd imagine - don't know for sure) varies across schools from nearly STEM-like training to the old model of basically teaching the diplomatic history of the US. I wouldn't worry too much if you have a basic background in stats and math. Some formal methods might not hurt if you can find an undergrad course covering game theory in the econ dept (or poli sci if you're lucky) - grad courses work too, just dont know how in depth you want to go. Edited: for severe lack of coffee

Yup. Normally I say too much. Going to let silence speak for me

Hey guys, Rough evening last night: 1.) Official rejection from Chicago - sympathy CIR w/ funding 2.) On the "very short" waitlist at Syracuse 3.) rejected from Maryland I assumed the above, so this isn't a shock - I've been considering my cycle over for a week or so now, but to see it all in black and white at the same time is, nontheless, sort of sad. Given the reaction of Maryland, Syracuse and Umass - I think this makes the case for fit being important. (these were schools that I didn't do as good a job showing that my interests fit, and I was prepared to work with their faculty towards completion of those goals). How's everyone else doing?

I had one like that! Umass was literally "There has been a change in your application status. Application:DENIED" I later got a very nice note from the dept, but this was the official reply from the grad school. Short and to the point.....

Didn't think of that....maybe they've got 2 positions? I'd like one! Just saw this again, still one of my favorite lines...just so slick - maybe it'll make awful internet less painful: Mycroft: Fire her. She's got it the wrong way around. You're under stress right now and your hand is perfectly steady. You're not haunted by the war, Dr Watson. You miss it.

Haven't gotten Chicago's rejection yet....maybe this means they've forgotten to accept me !

I don't think there's a wrong way since we both did things in an opposite manner, and had sucessful cycles. In the end, that's what matters. Congrats again!

Tthe gibberish edit was me - the dangers of posting before a cup of coffee! It sounds like you've got quite a conundrum on your hands. It sounds like your idea of evaluating your attachment to your region of interest will be key. Personally, I tried to avoid any focus on (current) regional focus, because I know myself to be an academic magpie - I flit around the globe in terms of regional focus. (Today it's Iranian nuclear ambitions, last year it was N. Korea, before that it was applying rational choice models to conflict in the Middle East etc.) Perhaps we're facing similar problems? I think I *should* go to one school, but the people at the other completely in synch with my interests, and I want to go just for them. Best of luck with the choice!

I have a feeling that many top tier programs have more similarities than differences. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if we see much less variation across programs than we imagine when we actually get there. My gut feeling is that the major differences will be size, focus on methods, and location. Thoughts?

Hi Politicsgirl, Congrats on a sucessful cycle! I'm glad this strategy worked for you. I have a feeling that showing up in person may have made the difference? The advice I got was pretty universally against contacting professors, unless I had a REALLY compelling reason (beyond: "I liked you work, and I think you could be a great advisor") Both professors who really mentored me directed me (independently) to this website: http://kuznets.harva...ey/gradadv.html - which contains advice from Prof. Susan Athey, an econ professor at Harvard. Granted this is for econ, but since our fields are increasingly similar in some areas and both in the social sciences, they told me to take the advice pretty much as given. (This also contains some great advice for the rest of the cycle, and for visiting if anyone's interested)

According to my profs, it's actually frowned upon in some circles. It really depends on their personality and if you have a REALLY good reason to contact them (you want to base your work off of their previous research etc) but multiple professors told me independently that if I contacted professors beforehand there would be one of three reactions i) they would ignore me (most probable result), ii) prefunctory reply, iii) They would see me as someone who didnt understand the process (admissions comittee model). Apparently this is a newish phenomenon. What I heard was that professors used to be MUCH more open to pre-app contact, but this declined when some eager beavers started emailing everyone on a departments contact list with little to no real reason for doing so. Edited: for gibberish

On a serious note, Gary King has done a lot of work in this area too. His book "Unifying Political Methodology" has a good discussion on the dangers of "kitchen sink" variables.

As long as you use White's standard errors - ain't no way that error term is homoskedastic!

On a tangential note, can I borrow this for my dissertation defense? Something like: "I therefore concluded with a 95% confidence level that this is the true model... But estimating it drove me bats***t so... I used this one instead!" Would be wicked