readeatsleep

Indeed, the figure I mentioned could be the percentage of applicants who enrolled. But given the (apparent) spike in applicants last year, and the trend toward more selectivity in Northwestern's figures over time, I think the 4 percent characterizes the applicants to acceptances in 2010 (7% in 2009, 11% in 2008). But all this information from the link posted is nice to have!

I'm an NU grad student watching this conversation out of a macabre sense of sympathy and horror. The acceptance rate last year was apparently about 4 percent. I'm told that it was lower in Political Theory. Good luck to everyone! And remember not to take your failures OR your successes in this game of acceptance too personally.

scalia - if you want to teach, get the PHD you would only be able to teach with your JD if its from harvard, yale, chicago, or another ultra-prestigious law school. if you are worried about research, it is totally fine to focus on teaching. not all political scientists are research junkies, and there are plenty of schools that are looking for teachers, not researchers. good luck!

tan is right on - the programs strong in the kind of political theory you are talking about are chicago, northwestern, johns hopkins, berkeley, and cornell. i think that most of these programs also slant towards qualitative analysis of political phenomena (i know berkeley, chicago, and northwestern do). happily, you have lots of time to research. it seems that the programs that are geared towards the kind of radical/continental political theory you mention also tend to be geared towards the quantitative aspect of political analysis. however, i suggest that if you are going to make theory your primary focus, you should concentrate your efforts on finding the theory faculty that best matches your interests, since this subfield is more likely to have a smaller and more focused faculty. the divide in theory isn't so much between qualitative and quantitative approaches, but actually much more complicated, and requires looking into the actual work of potential advisors. with regard to your question on exams, most programs these days require essays (i think?). also, theorists are northwestern don't need to take quantitative analysis classes (yes!).

I totally disagree with you, LadyL. you treat your acceptance as property, as if its something you own that you can do whatever you'd like with. the reality is that, by sitting on an offer that you know you will reject, you are making life worse for a number of people on the waitlist. so, sure, it's your "right" not to inform the school of your decision just like its my "right" not to be kind to strangers, not to donate to charity, or to throw food and goods away instead of donating them, etc. the note you received is definitely a little terse, but i think you should consider the positions of others (the department, students on the waitlist) on not just your own fancy in this situation.

go to nssr. students there are all really happy, really motivated, really smart. fraser is awesome, kalyvas is an up and coming theorist, and nyc is great.

CIR is not MAPSS

ive heard from MULTIPLE reliable sources that the m.a. students at chicago are treated like second class citizens, absolutely cannot get any attention from professors, and do not generally have luck getting into top programs afterwards. however, as a student finishing up an m.a. at a different program and attending a top ten theory program, i agree that doing an m.a. before the phd is a great experience. teaches you what you need to do as a graduate students, how to get ahead, and what to focus on, etc.

What are your interests within political theory?

Hello all - I turned down an offer from notre dame in theory. Good luck to everyone on the waitlist.

That's funny - I earned my m.a. Not as a means of garnering prestige, but in an attempt to remove myself from that ambition entirely. Thus, my m.a. Is in philosophy from an unranked, radically left leaning program. But I've become more sensitive to the practical, job-training aspect of the discipline in general, and only applied to top ten theory programs. Happily, there is still some radical thought in these programs too! I respect the ambition to join the ivies or oxford/Cambridge. But you should know that once you get there, the shine will wear off. One of my best friends just won the Rhodes scholarship and is almost regretting the whole enterprise because he realizes oxford is prestigious but not necessarily where he wants to be. You can be happy (and academically succesful) at alot of great institutions.

not sure if you are looking for opinions at the moment or not, rossiya, but I agree with scarlet. I'm finishing an m.a. Presently and have had this problem. But the biggest problem I think students find with these types of m.a. Programs is a lack of attention from professors. Not only does this make the time spent earning the degree comparable to another senior year as an undergrad, it lowers expectations, hurts feelings, and gives the wrong impression of what serious graduate work is. But I'm sure that, with your ambition, you will find success with whatever option you choose.

I doubled majored in philosophy and a program modelled on the program oxon was in at oxford (PPE) called the college of social studies. My first m.a. is in philosophy.

I agree with Foucault that one should apply broadly in terms if things like location, but I wish I had not applied to broadly over all. There are a few schools I should not have applied to because they are a bad fit (Princeton is the most obvious in my case, but also Columbia and Cornell). I would start with the top 10-15 institutions in your subfield, then take rossiya's advice and make sure you can find at least two professors you would want to work with. And be honest with yourself - if you find yourself stretching to find a second compatible interest, chances are the school isn't a great fit. Ideally, you would have 3+ professors who fit your research, not one and a half.

leaning towards NU at the moment, but I'm looking forward to both recruitment weekends.

Congrats on JHU frosted - thats a realy great program. is it your top choice? when is visitation weekend? and any word on what the stipend is this year?

I have not heard anything.

curiousgeorge, i agree with almost all of what youre saying, but none of it is mutually exclusive with the idea that there is a significant aspect of randomness involved in the process. and this randomness does not only involve YOUR SOP. for example, your reccommenders could say something that a committee member didn't want to hear, or simply be someone who a committee member doesn't like. additionally, there are often multiple students applying to work with the same few professors, and letting them all in would restrict the amount of space to let in other students who want to work with other professors within the same subfield. i made the mistake of applying to a bunch of schools that do not fit my research interests. however, i was rejected from a school that is the best fit for me. if thats not random, i dont know what is. luckily, i applied to other schools that fit well and am on my way. but describing this process as if its all predestined is nuts. contingency is a fact of life that cannot be eliminated through planning, research, etc.

im sorry to hear that brouhaha. you should know, though, that those MA programs are cash cows, and students in those kinds of programs often feel neglected by professors. im not sure it would have been the best choice anyways.

I stand corrected. I suppose I get the idea of a 'specialty program' from my own, relatively insular perspective on Northwestern and political science in general.

hmm, that is encourging but not what I expected. I would think NU to be well above ND not only in terms of general rank, but in theory specifically. USNWR aside (NU = 21, ND = 36 overall; 7 and 10 respectively for theory), NU is top ten on the Schmidt/Chingos list, with few Departments that can match it's reputation for theory above it. It's clear to me that NU is a superior program, but I am wondering what the tradeoffs are for going to a 'specialty program' that focuses it's resources not only on one subfield, but on a particular tradition within that subfield. Anyways, it's all very encouraging and I appreciate the advice.

hello realist; thanks for offering your frank advice. you mention that one should go to the best school "by subfield" that one can. i am wondering if a school that is stronger in one subfield than any other is still a wise choice in that subfield. specifically, i am thinking about northwestern for theory (northwestern is not terrible in other subfields, just not as strong). it is ranked high for theory, and even still this is probably not high enough given its faculty and strength in critical/continental thought in particular. but, when applying to jobs comes around, will i be evaluated in terms of my 'well roundedness' as a political scientist in general, or mostly with regard to political theory in particular?

Did anybody apply to the committee on social thought at U Chicago?

I was offered admssion to ND yesterday for political theory. Form email with a personalized attachment, followed closely by a very nice email from a theorist there and information on booking plane tickets with their travel agency. Recruitment weekend isn't until the end of march, so presumably there is still alot of time left to send acceptances. Apparently, it was very competitive this year (no surprise there...)

mass email with a personalized offer attached. May still be coming out, but I imagine not for long. Over 200 applications.