Overtherainbow

yep.

tell your advisor and the director of graduate studies that you're not sure if academia is for you, that you're unhappy doing the work itself and, at least right now, you can't see your future in this field. then ask to take a year's leave of absence so you can reassess your situation. they will all say yes. they will understand. PhD programs have very high drop-out rates (somewhere around 50% of those that begin never finish) and the sooner you know you want out, the less time and money you waste there, the more easily they'll let you go with no hard feelings.

once you're out, i strongly recommend that you don't trash your program in any way that could get back to them (i.e. on facebook). if you do decide you want back in after a year (and you might), it'll be difficult if they know you bad-mouthed them.

also, let me say that there is nothing unfair about putting a first-year MA student in a classroom with PhD students. you're not expected to compete with them. NO ONE is comparing the 3rd year PhD to the first year MA. you're expected to learn from them. someday, you would be the 3rd year student and some first year student might feel the same way about you that you do about your peers. also, when a class assigns 2 books + articles per week, the professor doesn't expect you to read every word of every page. in order to survive the rest of the semester, i suggest that you read the articles in their entirety and the introduction and conclusions of the books VERY carefully. then read the first and last pages of each chapter. if you have time, try to read the chapters more thoroughly. if you don't, that's okay.

good luck on getting out. you should be fine.

So I thought this would probably be useful as people get ready to start visiting campuses. I'm hoping to get other people (including current grad students) to chime in regarding impressions of various departments from personal experience, letter writers' opinions, previous visits, or general word-of-mouth. Obviously everyone will have different types of information, as we all have different things we're interested in, but hopefully some of it will be universally useful. So here's an example for one of the schools I'm interested in:

Yale - great internal funding options, poor placement record among CHYMPS (and some others) although improving as changes made in 2006 start impacting the students on the job market today, access to schools in the tristate (NY, CT, NJ) area, stronger methods training given recent hires but has a pretty high rate of attrition for good faculty, relatively young senior faculty, heavy focus on comparative pol econ, strengths in Africa and Latin America

UCLA - strongest area is methodologically sophisticated comparativists, wide regional focus, relatively competitive environment, strong formal theorists

UCSD - excellent IR scholars and IR training, regional focuses primarily on Asia-Pacific and the Americas, department is on the way up, reputation for close engagement with faculty

Clearly somewhat sparse - there is more that I can and will add, but it's a beginning at the very least. I'll be visiting 2 schools next week and will add them at that point.

Edit: I should also add, I would like help debunking any commonly held myths about various graduate programs. So if there's anyone out there with friends currently at a program, or who went somewhere as an undergrad, or who is currently studying at a school, please contribute.

Long time lurker, first time poster, already attending, etc.

I wanted to talk more about "fit" and the role of the statement of purpose. It is my understanding that the there are at least two components of the SOP that signal fit to the ad-com. First, the substantive focus of your research; and second, the presentation of that research focus. There has been quite a lot of information on the forums on the former but not nearly as much attention to the latter. What I mean by presentation of research focus is the way you formulate your questions, display an awareness of the significant debates in your field, and your ability to situate yourself within these debates with your questions. In addition, the specific terms you use to phrase your research is also a critical element of research presentation.

Now, why would this matter? Keep in mind that you are proposing to study a certain set of questions and ad-coms are aware that the chances of you actually carrying out that specific research is very slim. Applicants are known to exaggerate or just plain manufacture interests in certain substantive issues to just get their foot in the door. This is standard practice. In many programs with well-known specializations or specialists, a plethora of applicants will claim to be interested in the same sorts of research focus. Provided that at this stage, the applicants have comparable numbers and/or experience, how do you determine the "best fit" in these cases? It may come down to whether ad-coms judge your approach to the research focus to be interesting and situated enough. Of course, what it means to be "interesting" and "situated" is incredibly subjective. Given the eclectic composition of ad-coms, this means that the same SOP may "speak to" one member and not another, depending on how they conduct their own research inquiry. Some are averse to the "this is when I became interested in politics" anecdotes, some don't mind. Some care about how you use loaded concepts, some may give you a pass. Some care if you integrate faculty names throughout rather than just in the last paragraph, some don't. However, all pay attention to how you ask questions and what that says about your potential to do research (regardless of your actual substantive interest).

The point is not that your substantive focus does not matter. Clearly, it does. But if you are wondering why certain schools where you have a substantive match may have passed you up, I submit: this process is incredibly random and a lot has to align for one to edge out similarly qualified applicants to make the cut. One such variable is your ability to signal your fit not just with the content of your research but the contextualizing of your research.

I still haven't got my rejection from Chicago. Surely they sent out a mass email? Why must they drag it out even further?!

.

I generally find that people (as long as they like animals and are not allergic) *like* having a roommate with a pet. That way they get all the advantages of having a pet without having to pay for food or vet bills.

If what you really meant is that you don't want a roommate because, ugh, roommate--well, guess what living frugally actually looks like.

This whole idea of "qualification" to do the PhD is a little sticky, so I wouldn't beat yourself up. Plenty of very highly qualified people have had to repeat their application cycles (think balderdash & RWBG) - I think it's much more about learning how to show yourself off in exactly the ways they are looking for than about being "qualified." I'll hold out hope for you for this cycle, but if it doesn't go your way this year, remember that you don't know where you ranked in their applicant pool, and that with more information you are just more likely to succeed next year!

Wow, the results pages are just red all over today...

No results at night, applicants delight...
Red results in morning, applicants mourning...

I completely agree with Megan and others. You shouldn't feel any pressure at all to withdraw from any school until you're 100% certain you don't want to go there (and I agree - rank isn't everything - go to *all* the visits you can go to, even to the so-called "second-tier" schools). Of course, don't hold onto offers for the wrong reasons. That being said, you've earned every single offer that you've received. Take all the time to make the best decision for YOU.

To those of you who've been making pleas on this board for people to withdraw quickly: You should be soundly chastised for doing so. For whatever reason, you didn't make the first cut. That means you're in a holding pattern until April 15th. That's just the way it is.

One more thing... There are many misconceptions about how schools use their wait lists (this isn't surprising, given the unfortunate lack of transparency). Schools admit about 50% more people than they can reasonably matriculate. Therefore, a good number of people have to decline a school's offer of admission before the AdCom will move to the wait list. As suck, even if a handful of admits did, in fact, decline an offer quickly, schools would still be inclined to wait to closer to April 15 to pull people from their wait list (the danger of matriculating more people than you can afford to fund is greater than the danger of under-enrolling - schools are risk averse).

Being on a wait list and feeling like your fate is in the hands of others sucks. I get that. But pressuring and guilting admits into thinking that they're ruining your chances (or making you wait longer than you want to wait) just isn't cool.

I acknowledged in my post that this made you kind of an asshole, but I also don't know anybody either here or IRL who is actually doing this. I mean, these kinds of pleas would be reasonable if there was some evidence that there were a bunch of greedy grad cafe-ers sitting around giggling maniacally over their run on the CHYMPS and just waiting until April 15th for fun, but I just don't think that's what's happening. People who haven't turned down offers for the most part have a good reason, and posts pleading with them to do so more quickly when it is very unlikely to have any impact on your status in the first place just make people who are being completely reasonable feel like they are doing something wrong, and pressures them to make decisions in what may, for them, be an irresponsible way. So, my point isn't that you shouldn't turn down offers if you are SURE you aren't going to take them. You should. My point is all of these posts (and there have been a LOT of them lately) pressuring people into turning down their offers faster are unnecessary and, in some of the contexts where I have seen them, almost offensive (I.e. Congrats on your great offer, can you now call school X and reject them please because I am waiting to get in there).

They've rejected me twice now. My undergrad adviser suggested I take all my rejection letters, put them in a pile, and light them on fire. I think I will dance around that fire in the tshirt of whichever school I attend!

For people still waiting for Yale, they are not done: ‘We have not finished notifying applicants of their acceptance to our program. We hope to notify all applicants by the end of the week“

Just emailed them.
Good luck for all!

There is something wrong with me. Everytime someone mentions a troll, I think of a little naked pink a-sexual dude(tte) with orange hair. This makes me giggle. The admissions process is taking its troll.

news2yous: I'll try my best to share some thoughts/guidance in response to your inquiries. First, given your background, I don't see any major red flags that would undermine your ability to apply to PhD programs in the next cycle. That said, I think one of the most important things to consider is why you want to earn your PhD. You've made it clear that you are focused on research, but are you hoping to continue in an academic career or work outside of academia? If you want to be an academic, then the PhD is a logical step in that direction. If you are more interested in policy or other non-academic work, then I would seriously consider other paths to develop your research skills and research opportunities. In my opinion, the PhD is rarely a worthwhile investment if you are not planning an academic career. There are very strong masters programs, ranging from those that focus on IR to the MPP programs which can develop your skills in a much more efficient manner.

Now, on to some of your specific questions. I wouldn't worry too much about which subfield, IR or comparative, your research fits into. Much of the research being done in IR draws on comparative approaches and many comparative studies have IR implications. You will likely draw from both subfields and work with faculty in both, so I would probably frame your research as such.

As for whether your courses have prepared you for a PhD program, so long as you can convincingly write a statement of purpose that expresses enough knowledge of the field and your research interests, having a limited number of official poli sci courses should not be a significant limitation. Taking additional courses in econ. will be viewed positively, but at most schools is not a requirement. Given your strong quantitative background the committee should recognize your ability to pick up an array of quantitative methods to supplement your focus on qualitative work (hopefully you can also support this with a strong GRE score).

I partially addressed you question of whether to apply directly to a PhD or not, but here are some additional thoughts. I know there is significant disagreement about the pros and cons of entering a PhD straight out of undergrad. I believe you are well served by gaining experiences outside of school which will help you develop professional skills that you can apply in a PhD program and will give you the opportunity to try out other things, which can help you decide if the PhD is right for you. That said, plenty of people successfully enroll directly in PhD programs and do very well. The key is knowing it is what you really want to do!

Regarding the value of earning a Masters, it can certainly be helpful for developing your research ideas and skills. Depending on where you earn your masters, it can provide you the opportunity to work with respected faculty, get letters of rec from leaders in the field, and build a stronger application. This is particularly true if your undergraduate institution was not top tier, or if you have some blemishes on your undergrad record that you would like to improve upon.

I hope these thoughts are helpful to you. There are a lot of different ways to succeed in applying to PhD programs and to succeed once you're enrolled, so you just have to figure out what path is right for you. Good luck.

~ Adapt

As a general note to all applicants who haven't been admitted to anywhere yet: just remember that not getting in this year is not a signal that you won't get in at some point in the future, and a lot of the people being admitted now (myself included) are experiencing this good fortune because they are benefiting from the knowledge and experience gained from previously unsuccessful attempts.

it's 11:30 and nothing...i'm starting to get annoyed with my inbox.

Man, exactly! At this point I would just like some definite answers from everywhere so that I can just make a decision, be excited about it, and buy a t-shirt.

Hi,

I've been lurking here for quite a long time, and now posting for the first time.
I am claiming one of the Cornell acceptances.

Congrats to everyone who received acceptances today!