Advice for 2011 Sociology Applicants

[jacib]

I thought I'd start this topic now as a nice thing to do "for future generations". While not all acceptances have been sent out, we're definitely hitting the home stretch. I for one have already made my decision so I anticipate using grad cafe less and less, but before I go, I thought there were plenty of things I'd learned and could pass on. I post too much so I thought I'd let someone else make the first actual contribution to this thread.

What do you guys think were the key elements of your success? What do you wish you had done differently? Which old threads had particularly useful advice? What did you find out the hard way? What did you learn about Sociology applications specifically and graduate school in general?

[Grad00000000]

Great topic! I've left these answers scattered all over the forum, so some of this might be re-iteration...

I have a catalog of 'Will they accept me if...' factors. I had a bad UGPA, I'm a little older, first try on the GRE didn't go so well, and I don't have any coursework in the areas I applied to. So is what I've learnt...

The general stuff:

1) FIT FIT FIT FIT FIT: Don't waste time or money applying to the 'Well, no one there really does what I'm interested in, but they might be curious' schools. I did this for a few (I haven't even listed them in my signature because I'm so embarrassed now when I reflect upon it). It was an expensive lesson. Also, a GREAT fit will help them to overlook some of the less desirable areas of your application.

2) GET IN TOUCH WITH THE FACULTY: Relates to the above - you will soon find out whether they are interested in your work, and whether it is worth your time applying. A short simple email outlining your intention to apply, your background and asking them if they are taking students seemed to be enough to get this conversation rolling. You will also be surprised how far a Professor will go in championing your application if they really like your research ideas.

3) DON'T FALL IN LOVE WITH JUST ONE SCHOOL: It really is a crapshoot. Try to love them all, because you never know where you'll end up.

The specific stuff:

1) ADDRESSSING A BAD GPA: I read everywhere 'Don't mention it in your SOP'. I'm not sure I totally agree with this, but I don't have anything but my own experience to look at. If your bad gpa was a long time ago, I think it is ok to artfully weave into your SOP a line about how you have matured. I do agree that you shouldn't put much emphasis on this though - one line seemed sufficient for me.

2) BAD GRE SCORES: There doesn't seem to be a way around this - I had to take it again. Especially since I had the aforementioned bad gpa. Things I found useful... Verbal - start early, and if you have easy access to a computer use the program 'Anki' for your flashcards, the best way to improve your score is to improve your vocab; Quant - if, like me, it has been a LONG time since you looked at a triangle, go to your local library and get some high school math texts. Don't just jump into practise tests, you need to build the foundations first; AW - Use 'Score-it-now' at least once, so you get an idea of the way they like you to answer the essays. I bumped my scores up considerably the second time through a lot of hard work.

3) LACK OF COURSEWORK IN YOUR FIELD: Use your SOP and CV to demonstrate how your experience prepares you for your studies. Make sure your plan of study is well researched and uses the vocabulary of the field. If you have a good relationship with your rec writers, ask them to talk about your developing abilities in the area you are moving into. This is the approach I used, and while it didn't work everywhere, I was told by a Prof at a program that I got into that my CV and experience helped them to overcome their nervousness about my lack of academic background.

I hope this is helpful to someone. Good luck!

[hip2btriangle]

1) don't f up on the GREs (even though they say it's just one part of the application)

2) fit. make your SoP look like something people at these schools want to read.

[socialcomm]

1. Contact faculty early and keep the conversation going. If you're local or can visit, DO IT! Also, if you're local, see if you can attend any of their colloquia series lectures.

2. Start your SOP early.

3. If you've been out of school for a few years (um, or more in my case), don't hesitate to contact past professors for LORs. Jog their memory as to who you are, if you need to.

4. Don't give up if you don't get any acceptances the first time around. Or even the second time. I got in during my second round of trying, but I would certainly attempt again next year if I hadn't. However, make sure you take a hard look at your complete application to determine where you can bolster it and create a better complete package the following year, don't just submit what you did the previous year.

[ilikemoney]

I'll start with a story and then draw conclusions.

**

I was invited to an "applicants weekend" at the University of Pennsylvania. This was for an application I put in to study education policy at their graduate school of education. They invited 40 out of over 400 applicants, and it broke down to about 5 people per program track. I quickly realized a few things. First, everyone who was invited had stellar, stellar resumes. Meaning, nearly perfect grades, high GREs, and great work experience. It was a confirmation of what I knew abstractly: extremely talented people with extremely strong records apply to extremely strong schools. Furthermore, they were all articulate and had great personalities. Competition is tough.

Of the 40 people invited, I think a little over half were probably offered positions there. I was placed on a wait-list as I assume everyone else invited to the weekend who didn't get accepted. It was clear that few people there were going to get rejected for being unqualified and unsociable. Rather, those who got in fit with the style of the school and faculty, and more importantly, their research interests. I didn't have a perfect fit and that became to me very clear, especially during interviews.

Of course, I left the interviews thinking: if only I had said that x, y, and z were my interests, and I'd like to study them with methods a, b, and c. Perhaps that would have done the trick, had they not been able to read the lack of enthusiasm on my face. But in the end, I was honest about my approach and interests and they were not sufficiently receptive to that. So I probably don't belong there and had they accepted me I would have been less likely to thrive.

**

In the end, this is what I learned from this experience and the rest of the application process.

Rules:

1: A good academic record and good experience is a necessary condition for a successful application, especially at a top school. However, it is not a sufficient condition.

2: Fit with the style and interests of the program is a necessary condition for a successful application, espectially at a top school. However, it is not a sufficient condition.

3: Luck is a necessary condition for a successful application, especially at a top school. However, it is not a sufficient condition.

4. A good academic record + fit + luck is sufficient for a successful application, especially at a top schools.

5: You can't take rejection personally and your succeses is in some ways out of your hands.

Advice:

1: To the extent that you can, while still being true to your interests and capacities, tailor your SOP and LORs for the school you are appyling to. Most schools don't interview, so they're going to determine fit based upon what you say about yourself and what others say about you.

2: Don't count yourself out at top schools or fields outside your specialty. If you truly have something to offer the program, you have a chance anywhere, so long as you meet rule 1 above.

3: You can't take rejection personally. Your interests are what they are, and even if you are very competitive on paper, you will probably not be admitted unless you fit well and have some luck with how your interests and talents much up against the accepted applicants.

4: Be very gracious and proud of your acceptances, particularly the funded ones, at top schools. If you were admitted, and the school is willing to pay for you, that means they want you there. This is a necessary condition, I would imagine, for a successful doctoral experience.

5: Apply widely, but appropriately. It's unlikely, even with a 4.0 and a 1600 GRE, that you will get in everywhere you apply. You need to cast the net widely. That said, don't apply to Harvard just because it's Harvard. Apply there because you fit. I made the mistake of applying to top schools I didn't seriously consider just to "see what would happen." What happens is I got rejected, and I could have used that money to buy beer.

Other comments:

I'm kind of ambivalent about professor contact ahead of time. I didn't do it at all, and I got into my top choice. My top choice was literally less than a half-mile from my house, and I was in the first flight of their admits. They had never met me nor heard from me and they knew I was right next door. In the end, it didn't matter -- I fit well so I got in. It may help your application to talk to the faculty, but it's not in every case necessary. Honestly, it's probably better for finding out if your application stands a chance. In any event, if they want to talk to you, after reading your application, they will get in touch. If it's your style to talk ahead of time, go ahead and do it. I guess I was just kind of a hands-off kinda guy. I figured, if they wanted me, they'd want me.

Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.

[Grad00000000]

It may help your application to talk to the faculty, but it's not in every case necessary.

West - I do agree with you for the schools I applied to who place emphasis heavily on the numbers, but I want to share two experiences I had to highlight useful things that happen with Prof contact:

School A: I contact Prof with usual 'Hi, I'm interested in your work...' email. Had a one line response, not even personalised 'I am not taking students this year'. I stupidly still wasted my time and money applying. This was the quickest rejection I got. I really shouldn't have applied given that this Prof was the only person in the faculty with similar interests.

School B: Contacted Prof with same email outlining my background and research areas. Turns out he had just had a project funded on a very similar topic and was struggling to find a matching student who could RA for him. He wrote an additional LOR for my application, based only on our email conversations. He spoke on my behalf to members of the committee, and he found me extra funding .

It is hard to predict how faculty contact might help your chances, but as long as you are articulate and concise in your email I don't think it ever hurts them.

[carolina45]

I would agree with the other posters that fit is pretty much the most important thing. I applied to several schools thinking "well...there isn't exactly anyone there doing what I want to do, but maybe they'll find me unique/different/interesting". I was so, so wrong. (I even applied to a school where a professor I contacted told me not to bother applying because my research wasn't being done there). Pretty much a complete waste of time and money. Oh well...live and learn, right?

Foruntately I've been accepted to a school with full funding. Even though I guess it wasn't my "top choice", I knew from the very beginning it was by far my best fit. So I'm very, VERY happy.

[taiwanadian]

This is a great topic!

Could anyone expand on how you emphasized on your good fit with the university in question in your SOP? Did you do it solely by talking about your interests? Did you specifically point out professors you'd like to work with?

Thanks

Edited March 4, 2010 by taiwanadian

[Grad00000000]

Did you do it solely by talking about your interests? Did you specifically point out professors you'd like to work with?

I not only mentioned Profs, but specifically talked about why I wanted to work with them. I put all this in the last para of my SOP - XX School is such a great match for me because Prof A and I share an interest in lalala, and Prof B and I share an interest in xyz.

I can't speak on behalf of all schools, but I know that one I applied to sent all apps to relevant Profs (as mentioned in SOPs) for their comment prior to sending them to the Ad Comm. They have to make sure someone will want to be your supervisor if they let you in.

[focused]

This is a great topic!

Could anyone expand on how you emphasized on your good fit with the university in question in your SOP? Did you do it solely by talking about your interests? Did you specifically point out professors you'd like to work with?

Thanks

I "showed" my fit throughout by discussing both my past research and future research plans. I then followed-up on this "showing" by explictly "telling" of the fit in a designated "fit" paragraph. Here I discussed specific professors and any centers from which I could benefit. But I think the key is really the showing. By the time the adcoms get to the actual fit paragraph, they should already know generally what you're going to say and/or be nodding, thinking "Well of course this applicant wants to work with Profs A and B and in conjunction with Center Z." Just my two cents; I'm sure other strategies work equally well or better. However, this was advice that was given to me and helpful in my SoP, so I hope that applicants next year can also benefit from it.

[jacib]

I "showed" my fit throughout by discussing both my past research and future research plans. I then followed-up on this "showing" by explictly "telling" of the fit in a designated "fit" paragraph. Here I discussed specific professors and any centers from which I could benefit. But I think the key is really the showing. By the time the adcoms get to the actual fit paragraph, they should already know generally what you're going to say and/or be nodding, thinking "Well of course this applicant wants to work with Profs A and B and in conjunction with Center Z." Just my two cents; I'm sure other strategies work equally well or better. However, this was advice that was given to me and helpful in my SoP, so I hope that applicants next year can also benefit from it.

I think Focused really nailed how to write fit. My fit paragraphs in my best statements were great and showed I knew what I wanted to do and I knew what I wanted from the program, not just in terms of professors in the department, but also interdisciplinary resources (I learned about even more after I got in).

My pocket change:

EMAIL FIRST: My future adviser chided me the first time she called me; she told me, "I read your statement and I thought to myself, 'Why hasn't this boy emailed me!'" I had her first in my fit paragraph, but the way she said it, it's clear that emailing first is standard. I hadn't emailed her because I knew we were a good fit, "Why bother?" I thought. Luckily, she was head of the adcomm this year so she took care of my application, but if she wasn't, who knows if my application would have gotten the attention ti did. I mistakenly only emailed the schools I wasn't sure of, saying "here are my research interests, do we fit?" Do that too. Departments will be honest. Listen to them. Oh, and FYI, even if they say "Yes, you are exactly the kind of student we want," it doesn't guarantee you're in.

BE CLEAR IN YOUR RESEARCH INTERESTS: This should definitely be the case. Even if you know your project will change. They know that too. But part of what they want to see is that you are "serious" about the field and can think about these question. Also, I was warned in very similar wording by two different sociologists that applying simultaneously to Sociology and another field (in my case, Religion) would be the mark of an "unserious" student. If you do do that, don't talk about it (that's what I did, it was not a problem). But know that Sociology departments definitely want to admit sociologists.

TAKE TIME OFF: In my visiting day cohort of 15, I don't think only one (foreign) student came directly out of undergrad. About half (or more) seemed to have some kind of graduate degree (not necessarily in sociology). Many had experience at think tanks or similar things. I think only two or three people maximum had not been out of school yet (that is, they had gone the undergrad-->masters-->phd route). I'm not saying direct from undergrad is impossible, or equally rare at all schools, but some time off seems like a plus. Again, they want committed sociologists, not sociology majors who don't know what to do next. Two (out of the sixteen admitted students) were from the University of Chicago MAPSS, which is a nice one year option for those wishing to strengthen their resume. A Masters degree is especially useful if your undergraduate university was not very well known. For foreign students, three of the PhD candidates in the last two years had already come to study at this University on a Fulbright (I don't know the details because I'm American).

GIVE THEM A GOOD REASON TO ADMIT YOU: First you need to email people to get them excited about you. Then you need to give them some help to convince the committee (and if need be the graduate school). If you have a weak spot (and everyone does), make sure you also have strong spots. Know that different schools put different emphases on different aspects. I talked with another member of adcomm (who happens to be an acquaintance of my father's*) and he remembered very well my high GRE's and strong letters that said I was ready for a PhD program. It doesn't have to be high GRE's; it can be awards from undergrad, a very high GPA from a well respected place, a good graduate degree, published articles, relevant job experience (especially in think tanks, it seems), etc. Some thing to let an interested professor champion you at the adcomm. If you do feel a need to address a weak spot in your SoP, make sure to focus on the positive "Though I struggled my first two years in terms of grades, by the time I started taking upper level sociology classes, my GPA had increased by a whole point;" "Though I struggle with standardized tests, my high GPA in upper standing courses shows how excited I am about sociology." Something like that where the first clause is negative, but it ends on a positive note. So don't spend more than half a sentence on your negatives.

THERE IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF LUCK: At the visiting day, at this top program, very few people had offers from other top programs. I noticed professors being surprised at this (on a student by student basis, not necessarily a cohort basis). A few professors expressed surprise I didn't have other offers. I've heard similar things from students at other programs. One or two accepted students were surprised because their interests (race, gender, immigration) weren't actually the best fit with this department... but they had been rejected by comparably ranked departments that were better fits. You only need one department to accept you.

*For the record, a lower ranked department where my father's relatively close former colleague is chair rejected me. I don't want to give the sense of nepotism.

[2010international]

These are the pointers I would give:

1. FIT - that is absolutely necessary. However, fit doesn't have to mean that your research interests match a faculty's interests at all or even most levels. A lot of schools and faculty are doing work that is not necessarily shown on the websites. Especially in sociology, and I would think in the social sciences in general, it's important to make sure that the schools you apply to can fulfill most of your research needs (ie if you're interested in race/ethnicity, demography and latin america) the school should have either faculty OR research centers/institutes which would enable you to develop your own expertise.

2. I personally am not convinced by the argument of applying to a school just because someone renowned in your area of interest works there (hang on - i know his sounds counterintuitive, but hear e out. also, i want to add that I did apply to one school mostly on the basis of one prof working there, and I don't know what their decision will be). This is because this person may move from the school, or maybe you just won't get along with them. Depending on one person in this situation seems like putting all your eggs in on basket probably not the best way to go about it.

3. I know most people recommend mentioning faculty they would want to work with in their SOPs, and usually I would support this (I mean it makes sense, right? Shows you've done your research about the school, that you have a good fit with it etc), but (and this may just be me being superstitious) out of the 4 responses I have gotten so far (2 accepts and 2 rejects) I did not mention the name of the faculty in the sop for the accepts, while I did in the rejects.

4. Keep in mind that when you do get in touch with faculty, they may REALLY encourage you to apply to their department/school, but that does not mean that you will get in. I say this because I applied to a school - which during the application process became my top choice partly because it seemed to me the best fit and also because of the profs' very enthusiastic responses to my emails I thought I had the best chance of getting in.

5. That said, like someone else mentioned - cast a wide net. I will be attending a university actually ranked higher than my erstwhile top choice, but in the application process I dismissed said university because I thought my chances of getting in were very slim.

6. Don't discount luck. You have to realise that the adcomm is made up of humans. So, as my parents pointed out to me, some committee member having a bad day (ie fight with a spouse, someone in the lunch line got the last slice of pepperoni pizza before them etc etc) may end up screwing things up for you. We don't take these things into account, but it's pretty hard to be equally 'fair' and 'attentive' to all applications and little incidents like the above examples could screw things up for you.

That's about it. Good luck to everyone!

[ilikemoney]

West - I do agree with you for the schools I applied to who place emphasis heavily on the numbers, but I want to share two experiences I had to highlight useful things that happen with Prof contact:

School A: I contact Prof with usual 'Hi, I'm interested in your work...' email. Had a one line response, not even personalised 'I am not taking students this year'. I stupidly still wasted my time and money applying. This was the quickest rejection I got. I really shouldn't have applied given that this Prof was the only person in the faculty with similar interests.

School B: Contacted Prof with same email outlining my background and research areas. Turns out he had just had a project funded on a very similar topic and was struggling to find a matching student who could RA for him. He wrote an additional LOR for my application, based only on our email conversations. He spoke on my behalf to members of the committee, and he found me extra funding .

It is hard to predict how faculty contact might help your chances, but as long as you are articulate and concise in your email I don't think it ever hurts them.

You're right -- an email isn't going to hurt you, as long as it's not cloying. And it certainly is a way to find out if you have a chance. (I didnt' apply to two programs that I knew I had very little chance due to earlier faculty contact.) So I would say it's advisable to make some contact if you're not sure if you fit the department.

On the other hand, where I will end up -- it was so utterly clear from their research that I would fit there. My email contact went as far as to say "Do you take people with a non-sociology background?" to the secretary. And I got an enthusiastic admission and a warm reception from the faculty later. I guess my point is, an email conversation is not a 100% necessity, but can be very useful in helping you save money applying places that won't take you because of your interests, not your qualifications. But don't slit your wrists because you haven't been buttering up the faculty through email.

Regarding having a non sociology background: this is one thing an email can sort out for you. Someone noted that "sociology departments really want to admit sociologists." This isn't always true. They do want to admit people who want to become sociologists. But if your background is history or polisci or education, and you have some experience in the social sciences, and you're committed to what you want to study, this is not going to hurt you. Many departments don't necessarily want sociologists to show up, they want them to leave as sociologists.

[Chuck]

I want to thank you all for taking the time to put all of this advice out there. Take it from a prospective 2011 Sociology applicant, this is really really helpful!

I'm gathering that it's considered a bit tacky to be too specific about one's applicant profile on this forum, but while I have the attention of all you folks who have just gone through the process, I'd really appreciate some anonymous advice.

I'm an "older" (this feels really weird to say) applicant trying to get a head start on next year's admissions cycle. I think I'll be applying to environmental sociology, environmental policy, and/or geography type programs. That's a bit of a range, but I have a highly interdisciplinary background and I think I have a good "fit" with advisors across those fields and departments. I'm still in the early stages of researching schools, and I'm trying to make some choices as to where to hone down my list of schools. I'd like your frank advice about my competitiveness, given your recent experience with the application process at a range of schools.

I'm not concerned with getting into a tip-top competitive program, but much more concerned about fit. I'd love to go to a place that really "wants" me- and can provide me with a guarantee of sufficient funding to help support my family (yes, one of us will be making an actual salary, thank god!). One of my main concerns at the moment is whether I should retake the GRE. I took the GRE back in 2006 and got a 780 Q, 620 V (87%), 5.5 AW. These scores were fine to get me into a top master's program, but I'm worried that they: A- may be considered "too old" (even though they are within the last 5 years), and B- If I put my mind to it, I think I could probably do better given another chance. That being said, I'm a busy professional and if there is a good chance that these scores are "good enough" to get me where I want to go, I'd really rather not bother spending hours and hours and hundreds of dollars re-taking a silly exam.

Here's my basic profile:

UGRAD GPA: 3.87, top liberal arts college, science major. Excellent reccs, but this was... many years ago (do these reccs even still count?)

MS GPA: Officially ungraded, but something like 3.7, I should actually calculate that. A top MS program in environment. Good reccs (I think?)

GRE: 780 Q, 620 V, 5.5 AW

Lots of work experience in policy, writing, etc for a range of employers, some well-known in my sub-field.

What do you think? How do these stats bode with schools like: Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin, Clark, Berkeley ESPM.... wherever you applied.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Chuck

[whocanitbenow]

You're right -- an email isn't going to hurt you, as long as it's not cloying. And it certainly is a way to find out if you have a chance. (I didnt' apply to two programs that I knew I had very little chance due to earlier faculty contact.) So I would say it's advisable to make some contact if you're not sure if you fit the department.

Just an anecdote, but a professor I had been emailing with notified me a few weeks after the application deadline had passed that one of my LORs hadn't been received. He told me to get it in ASAP so that the committee could look at my file. I went to the prof who had written the letter, and he resent it. It actually turned out to be their administrative error as he had mailed, emailed, and faxed the letter to them, but it would have gone undetected had this faculty member not been on top of my application. Letter went in, two weeks later I was accepted.

I will say this about email, though, it seems easy for it to hurt you as well, to come off as pretentious, overly solicitous, or just inarticulate (to some degree I would think faculty members anticipate a hint of these qualities in such emails). This probably doesn't matter so much when the prof isn't on the adcomm, but it might cast a pall on your file if you do have a poor exchange with someone on the adcomm. I mean, 200-300 applications is a lot, but considering that far fewer of those 200-300 actually make contact with professors, you will probably leave some lasting impression if you do (and of course if they reply and engage you).

[Grad00000000]

Chuck - those are some nice choices for enviro focus. I would have definitely looked at Michigan and Wisconsin if I wasn't geographically restricted by my other half. You might also want to look North across the border. There are some great social-enviro programs in Canada too.

I can't really comment on your stats too much - I have no idea what the schools thought about my app. They are better than mine, but I used my heavy research & policy background as my main selling point rather than my scores. I think they are above the numbers ESPM lists on their site?

With your rec's, the main issue I see with using the same letters or writers you used in your Master's app is that they won't have enough research focus for a PhD app. The want to know about your performance in class, but they also need to know about your research abilities because this is what you will spend most of your PhD doing.

Regarding interdisciplinarity - I am in the same boat. My work sits right on the border of Sociology/Social Psych and Environmental Studies. This is why I also had to apply to a broad range. I don't think the schools were concerned about that, as it is fairly obvious when you read my SOP that I am bridging two fields. You do have to show you are prepared for the field you will be entering though (which means different SOPs for different fields - bummer!).

[ilikemoney]

Here's my basic profile:

UGRAD GPA: 3.87, top liberal arts college, science major. Excellent reccs, but this was... many years ago (do these reccs even still count?)

MS GPA: Officially ungraded, but something like 3.7, I should actually calculate that. A top MS program in environment. Good reccs (I think?)

GRE: 780 Q, 620 V, 5.5 AW

Lots of work experience in policy, writing, etc for a range of employers, some well-known in my sub-field.

What do you think? How do these stats bode with schools like: Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin, Clark, Berkeley ESPM.... wherever you applied.

My judgment: your stats are fine, and I don't think it's necessary you re-take it. Your GRE Q score is terrific. 780 is much higher than the avg sociologist and certainly shows some mathematical ability, which you'll need. It's the 89% percentile according to the last year, which means only 10% do better -- and most of those people are in the sciences. It's compettive enough. 620 V, as you probably know, is also 89% so you're in the same position. 5.5 is 92%, but only 1% of students get 6s. So a 5.5 is just about perfect. Sure, you might be able to bring the verbal score up, but I honestly doubt it'd really be necessary.

GREs are not going to be the deciding factor in your app, and they're high enough to not get thrown out at those schools, I should think. I wouldn't retake it. Would you really want to be at a school whose faculty would be willing to not take you JUST because you got a couple more questions wrong on a standardized test that has nothing to do with your field?

Your GPAs are good, particularly in a science background.

I agree with the poster who said you might want to get the recommendations updated. Why not just let the professors who wrote them know what you've done with research since you took their class? If they're agreeable, it won't take them long to update. (It really doesn't. I'm a high school teacher: I wrote 21 letters of recommendation this fall, many of which change from school to school. It doesn't take that long.)

Statement of purpose and writing sample are important. Make sure they're good -- but enough has been said about that already.

In other words, I think with you are plenty competitive as is, and if you put together a strong application -- go for it!! You have a chance at all those schools. That's no guarantee, but there are no guarantees in graduate admissions, as you probably realize at this point.

[pl0x]

I'll jump in, but with slightly different opinions on a few of the points here. I'll organize it by the components of the application.

1) GRE scores - sweat the minimums. I don't mean the bare minimums for acceptance by the Graduate Division, but no one really cares about GRE scores unless they're low (if they're high, it's a novelty thing).

2) GPA - Have a strict 3.5 or above (like, not even 3.48). It makes a big difference at schools that guarantee funding, because the Grad Division often has numerical cutoffs for fellowships.

3) SOP - Ask a good, compelling research question. This is probably the most important thing in your whole application, provided you have the baseline numerical qualifications. Every faculty I've talked to has wanted to know my interests, and trust me, you can get as specific and arcane as you want to -- it's a good thing. No one cares about anything else. Just find a kickass dissertation topic and write well about it.

4) LORs - most people aren't famous. Get letters that are really enthusiastic and specific.

5) School list - for the love of God, apply to 10-14 schools including a good handful of private universities. There are so many reasons for this -- the most obvious being that the more schools you apply to, the more likely you'll get in. But also, once you DO get in (and you will), funding will still be an obstacle for you. If you didn't get enough at your dream school, you can leverage your other packages to get more. If that doesn't work out, you can really think hard about whether going into debt/paying more is an acceptable investment for you -- and have options to fall back on. And with funding for so many public universities running out, you're going to feel the pinch in terms of worse funding packages, less acceptances, higher yields -- you do want to have the private school option insulating you a bit.

[myrrh]

Here's my basic profile:

UGRAD GPA: 3.87, top liberal arts college, science major. Excellent reccs, but this was... many years ago (do these reccs even still count?)

MS GPA: Officially ungraded, but something like 3.7, I should actually calculate that. A top MS program in environment. Good reccs (I think?)

GRE: 780 Q, 620 V, 5.5 AW

Lots of work experience in policy, writing, etc for a range of employers, some well-known in my sub-field.

What do you think? How do these stats bode with schools like: Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin, Clark, Berkeley ESPM.... wherever you applied.

I think your numbers are great, or at least least least fine for top schools. Actually they are very similar to mine with slightly higher UGPA and slightly lower GRE Quantitative. My AWA is much lower than yours, but as a non-native speaker of English with well-written writing sample, I think maybe we can ignore my AWA. For your reference, I'm accepted by two schools you hope to attend, while rejected by one.

Anyway, I would say, no worry about your numbers. Yes, if you retake GRE and get 700 something in verbal, it will be great. However, given you don't have that much, I would suggest your spending time building up your documents. You would have good fits with some schools, but what important is HOW YOU SHOW THE FITS, and it depends on how you write your SoP and writing sample.

[Chuck]

Thanks a lot, you all! What a friendly and helpful bunch of sociologists I have found here on the virtual interweb. Makes me think that I should weight my program selection to sociology over geography or environmental science

Thanks also for the reassuring words about GRE scores. I was pretty pleased with them 5 years ago, and see no reason to re-take. Honestly, it feels a little juvenile as a means of evaluation. I'd like to get my foot in the door, and let the real meat of my application speak for itself. That being said, I hear that many public schools use raw numbers for university-wide fellowships. And I read somewhere on this forum that schools like Madison don't even guarantee funding for some of their cohort (!!)- while 5-6 are given guaranteed 5-year full rides (from university-wide fellowships) right off the bat. It's this kind of thing that scares me almost enough to want to re-take the test! Almost...

I also got to thinking more about my application and it's made me a bit paranoid over all the unknowns.

When I was finishing up my MS, I was quite certain that I did not want to continue on to a PhD. In my last semester, I let my research slide a little bit and focused on my consulting internship (which ultimately led to a job offer, so I think that trade-off was worth it).

Anyway, I didn't do so well in my last semester of the MS (not horribly, but a couple of B's). I'm thinking this probably looks really really bad, especially since the B's were in my research classes with my advisor. I wonder what a good strategy for redemption might be here? I guess the issue is that I need to prove that I can follow through with research. I did present my MS research at a number of national conferences, so that is probably a plus. But I'm going to have to get an LOR from my advisor, and (the paranoid) part of me has no idea what she might say. What would you do in my situation? What are some do's and dont's for approaching my advisor? Should I address this discrepancy in my SOP?

Edited March 5, 2010 by Chuck

[myrrh]

This is a great topic!

Could anyone expand on how you emphasized on your good fit with the university in question in your SOP? Did you do it solely by talking about your interests? Did you specifically point out professors you'd like to work with?

Thanks

About my SoP:

I know that most schools want an about-two-page SoP, however, for those which accept longer SoP, I did write a longer one. As a matter of fact, my original draft is a five-page one, as the school with best fit to my interests accepted 12,000 characters last year (this year they cancel the maximum and the staff told me that 12,000 character would be fine). I got accepted by that dream school (of mine) in the end, and the five-page version SoP goes like:

(1) Firstly, after a short but interesting story about my fieldwork for MA thesis, I talked about my MA thesis research, and my recent works based on the thesis. I mentioned my publication in this part. This part has almost no change throughout all versions of SoP.

(2) Afterwards, based on my previous research experiences, I drew a broader theoretical (or at least conceptualized) framework, which I didn't have time or ability to fulfill during MA training, and told the readers that's exactly what I wanna do in PHD program. This part is always tailored.

(3) Then I pointed out what would be required if I want to do a research based on the theoretical framework. They are all specific research areas, approaches or topics. This part is always tailored.

(4) In the end, I listed several (usually three) professors in the program I was applying to, whose interests and topics were just what I mentioned in part (3). This part is of course tailored.

Practically, I did it in an order reversed to the steps above. That is, I found out the professors' name and interests (part 4), then I figured out what I can learn from them (part 3) and finally I built up a framework based on both my previous research and the professors' interests (part 2).

Hope it helps.

[ilikemoney]

Anyway, I didn't do so well in my last semester of the MS (not horribly, but a couple of B's). I'm thinking this probably looks really really bad, especially since the B's were in my research classes with my advisor. I wonder what a good strategy for redemption might be here? I guess the issue is that I need to prove that I can follow through with research. I did present my MS research at a number of national conferences, so that is probably a plus. But I'm going to have to get an LOR from my advisor, and (the paranoid) part of me has no idea what she might say. What would you do in my situation? What are some do's and dont's for approaching my advisor? Should I address this discrepancy in my SOP?

I would tell her everything you just told us. I'm sure she'll be positive.

[Sparky]

Thanks also for the reassuring words about GRE scores. I was pretty pleased with them 5 years ago, and see no reason to re-take.

Careful, though--GRE scores are typically only good for five calendar years. You will want to check with the schools you're applying to in order to make sure, but if it's been more than five years from the time the school looks at your application (so, spring 2011), your scores will probably not be considered valid.

[jacib]

Careful, though--GRE scores are typically only good for five calendar years. You will want to check with the schools you're applying to in order to make sure, but if it's been more than five years from the time the school looks at your application (so, spring 2011), your scores will probably not be considered valid.

My notes on GRE's

1. I got an 800 on verbal, 780 on math. I still got into out into only one out of five Sociology PhD programs that I applied for. No one should think that high GRE scores are a silver bullet that guarantees admission over other factors (a 3.26 GPA [from a good school], a non-sociology background, a good but not great writing sample). I think the role of GRE scores and other easily comparable quantitative factors are often overemphasized on this board.

2. I think the role of lower GRE scores is often underemphasized. I think many people don't consider fully the strength of the pool they're competing with. Don't read too much hope into statements like "we do not always eliminate people with lower scores." My father is a Sociology professor and he emailed his colleagues at program comparable to the ones I was interested in (but emphatically not the ones I was actually interested in) and got these responses [i edited them only slightly and only when necessary. I felt obliged to correct the spelling also]. Pay attention obviously to if they're discussing the mean, the minimum, the standards:

[Top ten public university]

Hi [Redacted],

I actually have a precise answer for this. Mean GRE of admitted students in 2008 was 1349, Verbal 644, Quant 705, and Analytical 5. In 2009, the mean GRE was 1409, Verbal 679, Quant 730, and Analytical 5.1

Of course, what really matters is the writing sample and statement of purpose. Good luck for [Jacib].

Best,

[Redacted]

[Top 25 private university]

We have not always ruled people out on low GREs. But generally people have at least around 630-650 in each. Sometimes verbal is a little higher and math a little lower. Foreign students often get by with lower verbal because they have higher math. Score in high 600s and low 700s do attract more instant attention.Some students with around 630-630 have decided to retake for application.

[Redacted]

[Top ten public university]

The percentiles have changed a lot over the years. I would say anything over the 90th percentile (just don't remember what the most recent numbers are) is considered a good score; below 70th is a bad score. If someone is weak in both verbal and quantitative, they would have a hard time getting in unless those scores were counterbalanced by an outstanding GPA from a good school. Then there's the third part, and I have no idea how to weight the [analytical writing]. Personally, i ignore it [the score] but look very closely at the essay [the GRE essays you write are sent along with your scores] and personal statement as well as the writing sample the student turns in.

Generally, it's a question of balancing one thing against the other, and I have found much to my dismay that recent admissions committees vary widely in how much they weight GRE's and sadly enough, individuals also vary. One low sore won't hurt; two low scores need to have something pretty outstanding to counter balance; a bad GRE and a less than stellar record will have a hard time, though we admitted one such person who won a prize for the best senior thesis.

My guess is that a place like [the above mentioned top 25 school] would be much more rigid than we are about scores, because they are more concerned with improving with their "ranking" and have a larger percent of demographers. At least in one case I can tell you [a top ten private university] is more rigid than we are.

------------------------------------------------------

Make of all of that what you will. My sense is that for top 25 programs it would be good (not necessary but good) to have one 700 or over if one is in the lower 600s, or alternatively, both in the high 600s, but something tells me that to the fallible humans who assess the scores, 700 looks very different from 690. But, like one of the professors above said, if you have another superlative aspect, it can compensate for lower scores. But even perfect scores won't get you in. I think, like one of the professors above said, it's much more writing sample and SoP once you pass all the minimums...kinda. You still want to get noticed. But the GRE is not going to get you a decisive yes, it might get you a decisive no. It might, just might, get you a "yes" over another specific candidate.

For more on GRE scores, see the Also, if you want to know how you stack up quantitatively to (a self-selected sample of) the 2010 applicants, see the 2010 applicants stats thread.

Edited March 7, 2010 by jacib

[jacib]

Other old threads I found informative (sometimes egotistically because information-vomited all over them... but also like the Talmud they contain a number of opinions which are both illuminating and contradictory). You wanted to know these because you're probably looking for a way to procrastinate actually working on your applications (just wait until you see how bad it is after they're submitted but before you hear back):

(very short)

After you hear back from schools:

What factors should help decisions? (and perhaps applications)

Those are mainly just ones from the sociology subforum. I'm sure I'm missing others.

Edited March 7, 2010 by jacib