Nazimova23

Decaf - Why don't you try writing standard introductory lines, conclusive lines and body introductory line(s) first, and then attempting to develop it into a legitimate essay with what time remains? It sounds like rather than investigating study options, you should be figuring out how to meditate and get enough rest (or stimulating foods) in you to write in a manner that meets standards for GRE essay organization.

I went through this process three years ago and now consult about it. Considering that doctoral applications are often evaluated by the department secretary and a few faculty, often in that in order, I'd say that a key element to most successful applications I've seen is an appeal in the personal statement to the research interests and work styles of several faculty members. They like to know that you're interested in enough in the work of several faculty to confidently RA and/or TA for more than one of them. Among the most undesirable applicants are the ones who seem like an excellent fit for the faculty member who just quietly announced that he'll be taking a job at another university. The other factors mentioned in this thread could be critical. However, since graduate school applications are assessed by actual human beings rather than machines, it's imperative that the content resonate with those human beings' goals for the department or for themselves.

Hi sciencegirl - Yes, I'm making a deliberate effort to be ambiguous about my identity for now. I'm completely with you on mixed methods, the congeniality and sincerity of the students and faculty, et al. One of the students told me a story about a fellow graduate student who needed to go on long-term medical leave, which would normally result in the suspension of her health insurance; she said that the department paid for her health insurance the whole time (I believe it). I doubt the department that I'm leaning toward joining is so hospitable, but professionally and [due in large part to the location] socially, the path there is so clear to me. I think some Stanford Soc. faculty might appreciate my research and ambitions but I don't know that anyone there could guide them well. My interests are just too interdisciplinary and influenced by the eros and grit of cities. I was also extremely uncomfortable with the size of the Stanford campus and the fact that people without cars are at an undeniable disadvantage, and the experience of subletting in strangers' San Francisco apartments just doesn't interest me after doing the same in NYC.

Note that Tomas Jimenez will not be at Stanford in the 2012-2013 school year, so the department plans to offer student-led training in qualitative methods. If you're sure that you want to conduct primarily qualitative research, it's probably a good idea to enroll in a program with at least a few faculty who specialize in qualitative methods. It's great when quantitative sociologists find your work interesting and you have peers in your cohort who share your interests, but ultimately, you'll want qual faculty advocating for you on the job market. There are some things about subfields and methodologies that other grad students (and certainly faculty who don't have expertise in those subfields and methodologies) just can't teach you.

It's amusing to read these posts in the immediate wake of the Stanford Open House. I can associate faces with screennames now since some of you broached the questions you've broached here live in your very distinct voices. Are any of you other prospective students feeling clear on what to do now, but more than a little depressed about it? I initially thought the funding package irresistable too but, given that I now know what some faculty and students who I consider "like me" think about Palo Alto and the department's methodological slant, I'm almost certain that Stanford is a poor fit for my career ambitions and lifestyle preferences. But I'm sad about that because the students were so infectiously fraternal, and it's obvious that the faculty care for them deeply.