Mnemonics2

^ I agree. And usually it is better to get a solid degree in a respected core academic discipline. Then, you simply study what you would've been studying anyway, but with much more academic credibility.

What an odd mix of schools. I'm assuming that represents where you think you fit best (which, fair enough)? I would tend to agree with cooperstreet that UCLA is a stretch but that it also might not be the best fit anyway. And I'm sure you stand a reasonable enough chance of getting into CUNY or Uconn if you are a good fit for what they want. Retaking the GRE is a good idea. Have you considered some of the schools more in the middle? For IR, even feminism, anywhere from UVA or GW (ok, the funding is awful there) to BC/BU/GMU/Arizona might not be a bad idea. People from these places get fine jobs and the training is still excellent. Question: You say you are at a small school in MA. Williams? That actually matters a fair bit. Williams is one of the best thought of schools in the country, so that would boost you a great deal for top programs.

I am current. Ok, so I haven't really thought out this advice (rushing downtown shortly), but I'll try and address a few things I saw here. First, the point made above about a few top people leaving, etc. is actually not that relevant unless you have some very particular fit requirements. The reason for this (and a good thing to bear in mind!) is that the department of political science has just merged with the school of public policy to make a professional school, the School of Policy, Government and International Affairs (SPGIA). And so the faculty size has doubled (and that's only in terms of Polisci professors, with individuals like Jack Goldstone, Audrey Cronin, etc. now in the "department"), as have our resources and our course-taking options. I'd also point out that having faculty on hand in related areas (we have economists, etc. too) is super helpful - I encountered one at an event a while ago and now we've just published a purty decent article together (method stuff). Note that our methods training is actually exceptional when you consider the new setup. Regarding placement and finding information, etc. there are two points that should be made. First, we just had a huge transformation, and a lot of the stuff that comes up with Google is old. That's to be expected, as it takes time for Google to index new stuff, etc., etc. Second, we are indeed a new program. Only a small handful of people have graduated. One has a TT job in New York. Another was never looking for academia anyway (they tend not to let those folk in so much now) and a couple who have just defended went out on the market. I heard their practice job talks for the interviews they had, but I don't know yet the result (I'm not close with them). We have another half dozen or so (first major cohort) in line to go on the market in 1-2 years. Beyond that....a few things about GMU. First, the opportunities beyond academia are definitely more real feeling here than at another non-DC school, even those much higher in rank. There is also a bit more of an international crowd here. Second, an academic job is a very real possibility if (as is the case anywhere) you work towards it. You won't do TT research at Harvard perhaps, though it is worth noting that three people have done pre-/post-doc research there now, but the potential is there. Our people have started getting very reasonable gigs and I expect that to continue (knowing, as I do, the next candidates to come out). Also, the reception I've got regarding my affiliation with Mason at conferences, with editors, etc. has been resoundingly a good one. Anyway.....AMA?

8 or 9 others, two others in IR.

I agree that a writing sample done differently for each schools is a bit much...particularly if you sensibly apply for a broad range. But changing a few times for big differences (a general polisci program versus a policy-oriented program versus a methods-heavy place) is definitely something to be done. I would also say that the substantively most appropriate essay sometimes isn't the best, if the alternative is something that demonstrates badass methodological skills. That being said, that is probably a rare enough situation.

Define "very reputable political science journals" please!

UVa has all ten of their places filled (11 actually since someone has government funding). From the mouth of the DGS. Unless one drops out, no go.

Hi all, A tiny bit of background. I'm into a fully funded program and I'm excited to be going in the fall. I've already got an MA (and a bit of other work experience), and my classes can essentially be completed (if I work very hard) in a year. Then, of course, I have to take months to prepare for and sit comps, maybe 6 months for preparing and defending my proposal, and 1-2 years for writing my actual dissertation. My question, if I may, is this: how soon should we start trying to publish? I have some very limited academic publishing experience, but an awful lot of foreign policy work put out from time spent in think tanks. I'm starting to make some attempts to research and write academic papers, but I'd love to know more about what is the optimal thing to do as a PhD candidate. Will trying my hardest to get out a few publications in the next 3 years significantly help my job search (particularly if the topics are in a vein with my dissertation topic)?

STATA for Mac definitely exists. I've been using it for the past three years. Works like a dream. Feels smoother.

^^^^^^^^ This! I'm not sure if OSU does an MA (maybe, but I didn't think so?), but that almost doesn't matter. You could easily transfer "for fit reasons" after your Fulbright is up. OSU background will almost certainly let you land at another top 15-20 school, and a top 15-20 background in general is almost guaranteed to get you a nice job (if you are in the PhD for the right reasons and don't drop out, of course). Or you get funded after year 2 from OSU anyway. Either way, you will likely still not have to go into debt to get a top 15-20 doctorate that'll likely land you near the top of the field.

I will say, I tried to be quick for the sake of others, but the paralysis did set in with a couple of the programs. It isn't a decision to be made lightly. But the 15th is close, and schools WILL pivot (rebalance? ) to the waitlist at that time.

Just to be devil's advocate, I would warn against other posters' comments that you are straight out not going to get funding at UW or OSU. The option is obviously there and there are OSU faculty members here that can walk you through the odds (and your Fulbright obviously changes things). I would just point out a serious differential in placement....I know it is a risk to go to OSU or UW, but OSU has recently placed people at the best CHYMPS schools and elsewhere. UVa and USC are placing at LACs and lower R1s at best. It is just something to bear in mind - if that doesn't matter so much to you, then ignore this.

I'd say forget about thinking of your management consulting job in negative terms. So you haven't done pure political science - big deal. Lots of great candidates don't and go on to do great things. I can think of a number of late blooming political scientists (and you aren't yet even in this category) who have come from random private sector jobs to do great things. And when you make it into academia, the private sector management experience could be an added bonus if it comes to positions where you'd also administer part of a graduate program. This year in Africa could be huge - if your interests are development or ethnic conflict or something, this is the kind of thing it is ok to focus on big time in your SOP. I would have to imagine the the folks at Wisconsin-Madison at least would be only too happy to consider you based on that. I'd say think long and hard about your interests and match yourself to a number of top schools based on that. Match whatever writing sample you are redoing to those interests and the types of analysis that those schools like. Then do a few things. Get in touch with professors well ahead of time. This is a big deal, because if you can do it early enough that you won't be ignored as opportunistic and ask about actual research, they seriously might remember you and flag you. Also, make sure your GRE scores are stellar just to make sure. No clue what your GPA was, but GREs are the obvious thing you've yet to do where you can demonstrate performance. Take them twice if need be. I'd also say, along with Marketman, that the MA/MPA/whatever could just be money you don't have to spend. That being said, it might be the best way to get your feet wet if you are at all unsure about eventual interests. Just saying.

Right? Sometimes it is amusing to go snooping through other fields' boards...just if you're bored, you know. Which makes me sound sad.

UNT, agreed. But again, probably different interests.

I do indeed. I'm young but have done the whole MA, RA in think tank, fellowships in policy while publishing in both policy and academia. Now I've just accepted an offer...but I've got to say that the two worlds will only work for you if you are either lucky or plan it right. PM me (and anyone else) if I can help, here or in the real world.

To echo PhDhopeful2013, there is clearly a gap in choosing between ranks and fit. If we're talking about #50 versus #5, then perhaps fit is slightly less important (which I'm cringing even saying that, trust me). But what is the cutoff? Essentially, I am choosing between three programs. The best fit is ranked ~45. The others are ranked ~36. Does the rank difference matter there?

PhDHopeful et al., what's the general view in the field on Temple as a Phd producing institution?

All great points. And very sobering ones too. That being said, I know that the polisci candidates at GMU (which is a new program by the way, which puts its small placement history and its relatively high rank for a new program into perspective) are being placed at their pre- and post-doc fellowships at Harvard, Princeton and places like USIP. I was given figures that NSF grants were awarded to more than 50% of one of their classes that are at the dissertation stage. So....this is all very confusing really. Not entirely sure how to read this.

Don't mean to make myself a target of "let them know" messages, but I've been accepted (waitlist for full funding but funded enough to go) and I'm thinking I'll maybe pass. I have to visit there and another place, but I should be able to let them know soon.

Only five days until the new USNWR rankings are unveiled. Is anyone else interested in seeing what has changed? Will it actually affect anyone's decision (change or consolidate)?

I think he is giving out some different information. I did get the same response, but with a slightly different tone. Not exactly positive, but with the offer of some hope.

Well (just to be pedantic and to try to make this as accurate as possible), that isn't true about 55 not being admitted. Only 20 will ultimately matriculate, but more than that almost have to be accepted in order for a school to meet its target for available slots. So the math is a bit better. Buuuuuut really it still sucks, yes.

Same. My cycle is now over. And...no rejections oddly enough. But weirdly, I don't feel exuberant because of that....wait lists suck and decisions are going to be hard.

Anyone waiting for GWU, check the apply yourself page. Looks like that school is not actually informing you. It is just up their for you to happen upon. Waitlist for me. There are rejections on the board too.