seraphita

Thanks for letting me know. Good luck with your other schools.

One school gave me extra time when I asked.

I'm in theory, and am curious to know if any theorists decline their offers from Notre Dame.

Adjunct professors get paid about 2-3,000 per class.

Also, if Georgetown doesn't cough up funding after a year or two, you can apply to transfer elsewhere.

You may very well receive funding if you're accepted off the waitlist. If a funded person turns down the offer, then his or her funding will probably go to anyone who's given the offer next. Still, for the sake of argument, let's assume the worst-case scenario--that the waitlists come to naught. I would recommend the public policy master's if you don't already have research experience, or if you feel you need stronger LORs. I don't think it should "pigeonhole" you, since poli sci research sometimes overlaps with public policy work, and a publication in a policy journal should certainly count for something when applying to poli sci programs. But if your research background and LORs are already strong, and the GRE is what's holding you back, then I would recommend concentrating on that retake.

What subfield?

NW is well-respected enough that I doubt you'll be living in a cardboard box if you graduate from there. Attending a top-5 rather than top-20 program seems more important for theorists than for the other subfields . . . and even if you *are* a theorist, there could still be a compelling reason to go there. If you're absolutely committed to feminism and critical theory, it wouldn't make much sense to turn down NW for, say, Harvard, where you might be taking theory classes from Mansfield. If you turn down some schools now, you'll get karma points for making the waitlisters happy . . . though, as a waitlisted person, I'm obviously self-interested in giving such advice.

I agree that you should be concise about your research interests in your SOP. But, once you're in a program, studying theory without actually majoring in it shouldn't be difficult. Some programs allow you a minor as well as a major field, so you could still take classes and even test in it. If there's no minor at your school, just take a bunch of theory electives. There's also no reason why you can't address theoretical concerns in your work, even as a comparativist. Fukuyama and Huntington primarily worked in international politics, not theory, yet are known for addressing normative political issues.

Are you trying to figure out your subfield so that you can gain admission to a PhD program? If so, you should probably do an MA first, simply because most PhD programs will be wary of accepting someone without a poli sci bachelor's and some research in the field. It sounds like you're interested in being a comparativist, but don't get too attached to your research project as of yet--it will change dramatically once you start to read published work in the field. Some people even switch subfields, not just research interests, in grad school.

I was in the same boat, yes, but with a different school. I contacted the school (WashU) and found out that I'm on an unofficial waitlist-for-the-waitlist. It's slightly less fatal to my hopes than an outright rejection (as long as some theorists who got offers or waitlists withdraw!), so . . . I wouldn't despair if I were you. At the very least, hearing nothing means that your application was worthy of serious and lengthy consideration.

Yes, my subfield is theory, and the email mentioned that I was waiting for a spot specifically on the theory waitlist. So my situation won't be helped even if a lot of IR or Americanist students turn down their offers; there would have to be some movement on the theory waitlist. The situation looks bleak.

To anyone who is still waiting for a response from ND, here's an explanation of my own situation from the DGS. "We have a very short list of officially wait-listed candidates . . . as well as another list of excellent applicants who could move on to the wait list immediately if others withdraw from consideration. You are currently at the very top of the second list, and so not formally wait-listed but still under serious consideration: you are an excellent candidate and we would be happy to extend you an offer if we had the resources to do so. . . If we are able to add you officially to the waiting list, I will e-mail you at once to let you know." So, in other words, there's a waitlist to get onto the waitlist.

My PhD department limits the number of classes you can take outside the department. So if you're planning on loading up with a ton of econ courses in a poli sci program, be sure to email the DGS at any program you're thinking of attending, and ask about the number of non-poli sci classes you're allowed to take. As for the methods courses offered within poli sci departments . . . well, the quality and quantity of these courses vary wildly between departments. I think there are some threads on here that discuss the strongest programs in quant. methods. Go to the websites of the programs mentioned, check out their methods course offerings, maybe ask for syllabi from the professors who have actually taught those courses, and try to figure out if they seem challenging enough for you.

Ah, I see. But why don't they just tell us that we're waitlisted? April 15th is the deadline for their first round of applicants to accept or reject the offer . . . so by telling us that *we* won't know until the 15th, they're basically saying that we're sitting on the backburner, waiting for their first-choice candidates to say no so we can get a spot. So, waitlisted. But, again . . . WHY NOT JUST TELL US THAT? Why not just send out emails letting us know where we're ranked on the waitlist, what the historic chances of getting accepted off the waitlist are, whether we can improve our chances by sending updated transcripts/materials, etc.? That way, we would have more information and could make a better decision about whether to say yes to another school's offer. Sorry, didn't mean to yell at you . . . I'm just so frustrated by ND right now, and really confused as to what their motives could be for NOT sending WL emails to certain people, since I'm pretty sure some applicants DID get the WL email. Are the candidates who got the email the top-ranked WLers?