saltlakecity2012

Hooray for other women on this forum! About fit - fit is a highly multidimensional characteristic. One can measure it along methodological approach, subfield strength, regional strength, intellectual culture, normative or positive inquiries, specific professors, even things like rankings. During the beginning of my application cycle I kept reading about how yes, fit is very important, but in the top departments (think CHYMPS and a few more), you can basically study anything you want, so fit is perhaps less important than promise. Promise is obviously somewhat arbitrary, but it is supposed to be indicated by LORs, SOP, writing sample, GPA, GRE scores, honors and awards, internships, and jobs. And perhaps some other things, as well. I would say that fit is probably very important in schools narrowing down their pool of top candidates. Let's say you have 500 applicants, and 25 slots. When you narrow the pool down to 50 candidates or so, ultimate decisions will probably have more to do with whether the department wants people who are studying what you want to study. So I would say that yes - don't apply to a school with only war and strategy scholars in the IR subfield if you want to do human rights or feminist theory research - it might not work out for you. But I was accepted to a couple of schools where I did not think fit was my greatest strength, and after discussing my application with professors from those programs, I believe it came down to the "promise" indicated by my application. I would also like to point out that admissions committees are well aware that people change their research questions all the time, and so banking on fit to get you in is a bad idea. Probably the only exceptions to this are if you have a long and successful track record of pursuing and publishing research in a specific area of inquiry. So work on the parts of your application that you can control - fit is about the the department's perception of your application, not your perception of the department's strengths and weaknesses. Obviously you need to demonstrate that you have thought carefully about why you want to go to University X (best indicated by listing a few professors at the end of your statement and providing a little bit of argument to back up why their work is relevant to what you want to do - just saying "High-profile Professor Y is awesome, and she's published a lot, so I would like to work with her because her work is very interesting" is not as good as saying "Professor Y's article, "Why my research is super awesome and interesting and you should read it", addresses issues a, b, and c that are highly germane to my own research interests."). But top departments will take you if a) they think you're good enough (whatever that means) and if you seem like you'd do well there. Just my thoughts. Edit: about indicating commitment to a research question - I moved to a country in my region of interest when I was 19, worked there for a year, wrote my undergraduate thesis about my experience, went back to do field research, studied the language of the region, took a job that would immerse me in the region after graduation, and also pursued both courses, work, and research opportunities in my substantive area of interest within that region. So I think that when I said "I want to study issue x in area y", I may have had more credibility than if I had said that I wanted to study the Arab spring because it was interesting, but had no background in contentious politics, revolutions, or the Middle East.

I'll take charge of NYU and UCSD. Please PM me if you want to get on those lists.

I'm still around! Firstly, I'm still waiting to hear from 2 programs. Secondly, I agree with the poster above who suggested we start a thread about impressions following visiting days. I'd point out that while this thread seems to have slowed down, a lot of new threads have popped up recently as people start to shift their priorities from worrying about acceptances to worrying about decisions regarding which school to go to, or how to improve an application for the next cycle. As for those of us still "waiting it out", this forum remains an excellent resource for hard-to-get information about when and how schools are making notifications, and other things. Congrats to all those who have gotten good news in the past few days, especially if it is your first good news!!!

Sorry about caltech. The Berkeley situation is very weird - if they're really trying to decide on all three of us still, there are presumably a few others out there - but the three of us are in very different fields, so either they have remaining spots in each of our subfields, or they've scrapped the subfield quota approach and the members of the admissions committee are trying to decide if any of us would make "good Berkeley students". Very weird. Perhaps they've resorted to coin tosses or dart-throwing... but no, then they would have been done already... Sigh.

I am seriously starting to wonder if Berkeley just forgot about us (@jsclar and apill)...

I'm with meep. These are huge questions, and I would suggest that you at least start thinking about how you want to approach them. From your phrasing it sounds as if you're heavily interested in the economics of the issues, but I would suggest you start to consider whether you are more interested in distribution of wealth and resources within African states or in the role African states play in the global economy. People tackle these questions from many different fields - sociology, political science, anthropology, history, colonial studies, economics, policy, development studies, international affairs, cultural and area studies... the list goes on. If you think you want to take a political science tack in looking at these issues, what makes the political science approach of particular appeal to you? That might help you narrow down what schools would be good fits - places with people who approach the issues in the way you want to.

Congratulations! Oregon is an awesome place.

I agree with all the points meep makes above regarding how one should go about making the decision to pursue a PhD versus an MA, but I would say to the OP that there are in fact reasons to pursue the PhD even if your end-goal is not academia. It's true that you can get lovely research jobs with international organizations with an MA only, but it's my impression that if you want to do more theoretical work, rather than primarily empirical, in a non-academic capacity, you are more competitive with a doctorate. I think this depends heavily on what you do while you're a graduate student, though - many of my friends who do development-related research pursue internships, fellowships, specialized training programs, etc. after advancing to candidacy, and thereby form relationships with the organizations they hope to join after completion of the PhD. If you sit around at your university for 5 years and form no connections and research relationships outside of academia, then you probably would be better off with an MA.

Okay, so they didn't just lose my and jsclar's applications What's your subfield? And jsclar, if you're around, what's yours? I'm comparative / pol econ.

Aha! I think I will do that. Thanks!

Also - other than jsclar, is anyone else still waiting to hear from Berkeley?

I agree that NYU's placement record is pretty impressive - I think along with Rochester, it tends to produce candidates with serious appeal to schools looking to improve their methods training programs (not everyone with a Poli Sci PhD can teach those classes). I spoke with a professor at Stanford GSB pol econ, and he mentioned that having a strong methods background is definitely a major plus on the job market these days. Also, I was corresponding with someone who recently completed their doctorate at NYU and has placed very well, and here's what he had to say: "Job market outcomes for NYU students seem to vary substantially from year to year. So, the year before last (the job market takes place in the fall), was great for NYU candidates. In terms of tenure track offers, one student accepted a job at Stanford, one at Dartmouth, one at Minnesota, and two at Essex. This past year, however, was not as strong with only one tenure track placement. My sense is that, in general, NYU students tend to only get interviews and offers at R1 institutions. For whatever reason, lower ranked research institutions and liberal arts colleges tend to overlook NYU candidates. As a result, outcomes tend to be very volatile -- since places at R1 institutions are very highly competitive." Edit: If, however, you are interested in career paths outside of academia, my impression is that NYU students (probably because of the intensity of the training and the econ strengths of the department of politics) do very well. Think tanks, consultancies, government agencies, etc.

I'd say that if you consider concepts like utility maximization, rational choice, and using capital flow as a unit of analysis to be economic tools (which I do, using the term "tools" to mean conceptual frameworks that underpin many parts of the discipline), then using economic tools to look at political problems qualitatively is doable. Here perhaps we venture a bit more into political theory than into comparative politics, but oh well. Re: the neo-Marxist stuff, I will get back to you. My initial thoughts are that neo-Marxists deal primarily with the location, transfer, and use of power - and that power can be linked very closely to utility in the study of the intersection of politics and economics. I haven't read any Poulantzas in years, though, but if I come across something particularly useful I will PM you.

Agreed. As that is my general vein of interest, I'm totally psyched about the program and can't wait to visit!

Sigh. I'm from NYC originally - hopefully I won't get too lost. Luckily I do have a few friends in the area who can rescue me if I find myself stranded in downtown LA

Given bauhaus' interest in political economy and formal methods, NYU is actually a great choice. Bauhaus - as far as I know, all NYU's offers have been made. Congratulations again on your fabulous set of options!

Love this. Here's mine: Dear Winter, I regret to inform you that your application to participate in the rest of my life has been rejected. Over the past several years the competition amongst the seasons for the limited number of slots available - only 4 per year - has grown fierce, and given your unreliable record in recent cycles, I find myself unable to offer you a permanent position. There were many strong elements to your application, such as fresh powdered snow and the wonderfully nostalgic scent of wood fires, but other applicants were better suited to the strengths of the program, which are: basking in the sun, not having to pay heat bills, wandering around outside without concern of hypothermia, etc. I wish you all the best in your future endeavors. If your interest in the opportunity to take up a permanent position in someone's life remains strong, I would recommend you seek out a program better suited to your particular strengths. Perhaps the life of a snow leopard would be a more appropriate choice. Sincerely, -Frozen graduate program applicant

Couldn't one argue that a lot of neo-Marxist analysis does exactly that?

I think there are 2 main uses of the term "political economy" - and I was just talking to a professor at NYU about this, actually. 1) Looking at political problems using economics tools. 2) Looking at the intersection between political and economic phenomena. I think you can do both types of political economy either qualitatively or quantitatively - so I suppose what we really have is a 2x2 matrix establishing the set of ways you can do political economy.

Awesome - thank you both. I am from out of town and will not have a car during the visit, so the train sounds like a great option. I appreciate the tip!

Looks like tomorrow will be another day of waiting on Berkeley. They really like to draw out the agony, apparently.

Thanks for letting me know! Definitely less crazy-making than it would have been even a few days ago, but still crazy-making. My last name is very early alphabetically, so I have no clue what is going on.

Is anyone else still waiting to hear from Berkeley? This is making me a bit nuts.

Is anyone else going to both UCSD and UCLA? I was advised to use ground transportation to go from UCSD to UCLA given that they're so close.

Did they say "by Wednesday"? I spoke to them on Tuesday, I think, and they told me that all decisions would be sent out by next Wednesday but that they hadn't finished sending out admissions. Do you mean instead that they are done sending out acceptances? In 2010 there were 10 Berkeley acceptances posted, in 2011 8, and so far this year we have 6 (can't remember how many have been claimed). So I would guess they're close to done if not completely done.