School X vs. School Y

[blankets]

Apologies if this topic exists already, I didn't see it on the first 2 pages of topics.

A lot of us have mulitiple acceptances and are having a hard time figuring out which school to go to. Since some of us have better researched some schools (and may have insider info) than others, I thought it would be nice to have a place to present these tough decisions to the Greek Chorus that is the internet and see if any insight can help fellow applicants.

It would probably be best to mention in addition to the schools themselves - funding/financial aid, type of program (MA (1 vs. 2 year), MPhil, PhD, DPhil, etc.), academic interests, and advisors at he schools that you particularly have your eye on.

[Keller65]

You first.

[blankets]

^ It was always forthcoming, I just wanted the intro to stand alone.

New School - MA - 1/2 Tuition

vs.

McGill - MA - Financial Aid info forthcoming

I'm a theory applicant and my interests are very broad and include: Tocqueville/Democratic Citizenship, Ideology and Culture, and Analytical Marxism/Critical Theory. I think this makes NSSR a better fit, and ultimately I think I'll choose the less expensive option. My aim is to come out of this MA in with a good shot at a top-5 PhD program and minimal debt (though some is ok, I didn't pay for undergrad).

[Keller65]

^ It was always forthcoming, I just wanted the intro to stand alone.

New School - MA - 1/2 Tuition

vs.

McGill - MA - Financial Aid info forthcoming

I'm a theory applicant and my interests are very broad and include: Tocqueville/Democratic Citizenship, Ideology and Culture, and Analytical Marxism/Critical Theory. I think this makes NSSR a better fit, and ultimately I think I'll choose the less expensive option. My aim is to come out of this MA in with a good shot at a top-5 PhD program and minimal debt (though some is ok, I didn't pay for undergrad).

NSSR would be cheaper, but Levy can get you into a top program (except maybe Chicago, for various reasons).

[Keller65]

Agreed.

My situation (and I know people have skewered me for this, but please try to be kind):

Yale MA - financial info forthcoming (there is a possibility of full funding)

Madison PhD - full funding

Chicago PhD - waitlisted currently, but had a great visit, so i'm optimistic

As I have said before, you are young and seemingly independent. Enjoy a year or two in New Haven and back your way into Princeton or Harvard. Not sure Chicago is the best place for a comparativist.

[blankets]

Thanks for the advice, Keller! I actually am excited about the possibility of expanding/exploring my research interests in what appears to be an extremely flexible program. I'm going to wait until I know all of the relevant factors (funding and the result of the waitlist) before making a final decision, however.

I'd agree with him, Madison is a great department (wish I was accepted) but in reference to your handle, unlike Fiefel, you should not go west :-)

[tomorrows verse]

someoneoutthere, I know your topic has been discussed quite a bit, and in the end it is obviously up to you, but unless I got full funding from the MA at Yale, I would go to Madison in a heartbeat. It may not be HYPSB, but Madison is pretty damn good, and I think you have mentioned that there are faculty members there who align well with your interests. I know the Yale MA is tempting (mouth-watering perhaps), but I've heard from several MA and PhD students and most of them seem to say that it is unlikely you will receive a great deal of attention as a student in a MA program. I have no idea about the dynamics of the dept. at Yale, but it's something to keep in mind. I know letters from superstars are always nice to have, but it may be difficult to have enough access to those people as a MA student.

Just my two cents.

[unclejoecannon]

Agreed.

My situation (and I know people have skewered me for this, but please try to be kind):

Yale MA - financial info forthcoming (there is a possibility of full funding)

Madison PhD - full funding

Chicago PhD - waitlisted currently, but had a great visit, so i'm optimistic

You need to carefully consider the type of signal it will send to people in the discipline if you turn down a good program like Wisconsin to go get an MA, even if it is form Yale. I am not saying that it might not work out wonderfully for you, but people talk and it is hard to tell how this move will be interpreted. Furthermore, the people at Wisconsin could easily be at a Harvard or Princeton when you next go out to apply and it is very likely that they will remember you, which could be good or bad.

[Keller65]

You need to carefully consider the type of signal it will send to people in the discipline if you turn down a good program like Wisconsin to go get an MA, even if it is form Yale. I am not saying that it might not work out wonderfully for you, but people talk and it is hard to tell how this move will be interpreted. Furthermore, the people at Wisconsin could easily be at a Harvard or Princeton when you next go out to apply and it is very likely that they will remember you, which could be good or bad.

This would indeed be Shakespearean, but to my knowledge somewhereouthere has been discreet, and so no one will know.

[plisar]

This would indeed be Shakespearean, but to my knowledge somewhereouthere has been discreet, and so no one will know.

Ugh.

SWOT, you know my opinion on this. I really think that you need to go to Wisconsin. I think that if Chicago comes through off the waitlist, you should go to Wisconsin. I think that you really need to turn down the Yale offer now so that you most assuredly take one of your two possible Ph.D offers.

[curufinwe]

As previous posters said, Chicago doesn't turn me on (academically!). I mean, I do not know if they study what you study, but I heard it is more of a qualitative school, which would decrease your chances of getting a job. In this sense, Madison is a better choice. (I am assuming you wanna do quantitative methods).

About Yale MA, if you think you can dazzle the professors in a year (when you start your second year, you will be already applying, so your efforts won't affect your recommendation letters) and get them to write really good letters for you, I'd say, take Yale's MA. As far as I have understood, money will not be THAT much of a concern to you so I won't mention that aspect. But in my experience, it is very hard to even get two awesome letters from one year of MA. I mean, professors usually expect you to take 2 classes from them in order to make a good impression.

So you might end up applying with almost the same profile, but one additional good rec. letter. You gotta ask if that's worth the two years. And quite honestly, Gtown undergrad degree places you into a certain pile of students anyways, Yale MA might not add that much of a marginal utility.

To sum up, what will you lose if you pick Yale? Some money, two years (of additional studying) (and two years of late entry to job market = two additional years you have to wait before you can earn a humane pay ), and turning down a phd program you already got into. What if things get worse the following years?

But then again, if you believe in yourself and claim that you can get an awesome GPA and two great letters from Yale, of course go to Yale!

Edited March 26, 2010 by curufinwe

[readeatsleep]

^ It was always forthcoming, I just wanted the intro to stand alone.

New School - MA - 1/2 Tuition

vs.

McGill - MA - Financial Aid info forthcoming

I'm a theory applicant and my interests are very broad and include: Tocqueville/Democratic Citizenship, Ideology and Culture, and Analytical Marxism/Critical Theory. I think this makes NSSR a better fit, and ultimately I think I'll choose the less expensive option. My aim is to come out of this MA in with a good shot at a top-5 PhD program and minimal debt (though some is ok, I didn't pay for undergrad).

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.

[fromark17]

Figured I'd throw in my own situation and see what people think. I'm in American and want to do behavior, public opinion, voting, etc. I'm trying to decide between UNC and OSU (UIUC is also in the mix but behind the others). It seems to me to be pretty much a toss-up between the two. Thoughts?

[curufinwe]

Figured I'd throw in my own situation and see what people think. I'm in American and want to do behavior, public opinion, voting, etc. I'm trying to decide between UNC and OSU (UIUC is also in the mix but behind the others). It seems to me to be pretty much a toss-up between the two. Thoughts?

True, that is a tough decision. I feel like I would be inclined towards UNC, but I have no idea why. But then again, when its a tie, feelings are the deciding factor.

[fromark17]

True, that is a tough decision. I feel like I would be inclined towards UNC, but I have no idea why. But then again, when its a tie, feelings are the deciding factor.

Yeah, I agree. I visited UNC and really liked it. I haven't visited OSU yet, so maybe that will clarify things.

[TDBank]

Agreed.

My situation (and I know people have skewered me for this, but please try to be kind):

Yale MA - financial info forthcoming (there is a possibility of full funding)

Madison PhD - full funding

Chicago PhD - waitlisted currently, but had a great visit, so i'm optimistic

Just wanna point out two things, with regard to someoneoutthere's original post and curunfinwe's comment. First, two out of three of your options are uncertain, someoneouthere. You should wait until you have full information before you make your decision. Second, every mainstream program is quantitative now. As far as your offers are concerned, UW-Madison is certainly quantitative, and has been so for a while now. Chicago's been moving in the direction of quantitative study, with the hiring of Ethan BDM being the definitive signal. The Yale's New Initiative has been decidedly quantitative-oriented, and people like John Roemer and Kenneth Schieve are as quantitative as it get (Michael Ting is insanely mathematical, I know, but he's one of the few exceptions in our profession).

Ultimately, assuming full funding at all three schools, my personal opinion is that Yale MA >=Chicago Phd > UW-Madison PhD. People seem to be thinking that the point of doing an Yale MA is to impress professors there and thereby gain a leg-up in the following year's admission season. However I think that the primary advantage of doing any MA is that you can get used to the graduate environment, and if you are allowed to take PhD courses, that would be an invaluable preparation for the long haul. Always remember that the PhD doesn't stop at admission, it's the second, third, fourth, fifth, and maybe even sixth year. It's a long time, and it's pretty easy to get discouraged without proper mental as well as intellectual preparation.

[curufinwe]

Just wanna point out two things, with regard to someoneoutthere's original post and curunfinwe's comment. First, two out of three of your options are uncertain, someoneouthere. You should wait until you have full information before you make your decision. Second, every mainstream program is quantitative now. As far as your offers are concerned, UW-Madison is certainly quantitative, and has been so for a while now. Chicago's been moving in the direction of quantitative study, with the hiring of Ethan BDM being the definitive signal. The Yale's New Initiative has been decidedly quantitative-oriented, and people like John Roemer and Kenneth Schieve are as quantitative as it get (Michael Ting is insanely mathematical, I know, but he's one of the few exceptions in our profession).

Ultimately, assuming full funding at all three schools, my personal opinion is that Yale MA >=Chicago Phd > UW-Madison PhD. People seem to be thinking that the point of doing an Yale MA is to impress professors there and thereby gain a leg-up in the following year's admission season. However I think that the primary advantage of doing any MA is that you can get used to the graduate environment, and if you are allowed to take PhD courses, that would be an invaluable preparation for the long haul. Always remember that the PhD doesn't stop at admission, it's the second, third, fourth, fifth, and maybe even sixth year. It's a long time, and it's pretty easy to get discouraged without proper mental as well as intellectual preparation.

Oh totally. "Me" two years ago and "me" now is completely different. MA is a great way to enter the academy and get to see where your interests are headed and what your capabilities are.

[Penelope Higgins]

Several facts to straighten out here:

1. recent hires at Madison who do work relevant to the poster's interests (like Herrera) are not quants.

2. Ethan BDM is at the Harris School at Chicago and has nothing to do with the poli sci department in terms of teaching or advising. Few of the comparativists at Chicago do quant work (Simpser will not be around after next year)

3. comparative at Yale is not fully quant - it is split: Kalyvas, Darden, and Wood do mostly qualitative work, while Scheve, Dunning, etc. are quants.

Most importantly, you should NOT make this decision based on methodological preferences: you should go to the school where the faculty work on topics of interest to you. I don't know who the Russia/post-Soviet person is at Chicago, so it seems to me like your choice is between Gelbach and Herrera at Madison and Darden at the MA at Yale. I'd choose Madison, but that's just me.

[Penelope Higgins]

I have heard that Kalyvas may not be at NSSR too much longer. So I would be wary about going there to work with him.

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.

[Ferrero]

Several facts to straighten out here:

1. recent hires at Madison who do work relevant to the poster's interests (like Herrera) are not quants.

2. Ethan BDM is at the Harris School at Chicago and has nothing to do with the poli sci department in terms of teaching or advising. Few of the comparativists at Chicago do quant work (Simpser will not be around after next year)

3. comparative at Yale is not fully quant - it is split: Kalyvas, Darden, and Wood do mostly qualitative work, while Scheve, Dunning, etc. are quants.

Most importantly, you should NOT make this decision based on methodological preferences: you should go to the school where the faculty work on topics of interest to you. I don't know who the Russia/post-Soviet person is at Chicago, so it seems to me like your choice is between Gelbach and Herrera at Madison and Darden at the MA at Yale. I'd choose Madison, but that's just me.

I think you waste your time. What will be amusing is when SOOT gets relegated to Penn State - Altoona after graduating (that is, if she ever gets admitted to a program that confers the appropriate name/geographic cachet).

[Penelope Higgins]

Read the Chicago posts here: http://www.poliscijobrumors.com/topic.php?id=21635&page=3 and do the math...

Thanks for your advice. I am planning on expanding my interests to non-democratic regimes in general, though, so I don't know how relevant specific faculty members are going to be in making my decision. Chicago actually just hired Stanislav Markus, who is a Russianist, so they have a Russia/post-Soviet person now.

How do you know Simpser is leaving Chicago? That would be sad if he did; he's a great prof.

[kaykaykay]

I did the MA- way I totally understand if you feel drawn to it. I felt really hurt if someone suggested I should not take it. Ok here are my 2 cents. MA-s are not cared for nor do the university or professors see them as permanent investments. I was the first to be sent out from classrooms packed with PhD-s. Think about it: nobody guarantees you can take your dream classes with your dream teachers, they have obligation to PhDs. (especially be careful with flexible programs: code word for take what you can we do not care)

Where they let MA students in to grad seminars often I was the only one (MA) who survived the course: I had previous graduate student training and have a thick skin. I had a bigger course load than PhDs because I had to take a certain amount of classes and I took classes with them to show that I can do it.(while they had the option to take less classes) Nobody worried about my study plan or health as they did with PhDs. Because you do not have a 5 year contract it will NOT be the place to discover new areas: in only 2 years you simply do not have time to experiment: one mistake can hurt you a lot. I met a lot of people who gave up the plan to get a PhD because this experience was too much for them. Also I was charged $50 000.

On the plus side I have a nice name on my CV and I took amazing, amazing classes. Later when I applied for PhDs I got the support of several amazing people. Definiely I hoped to stay on to PhD so much as I did not have real safeties and I ended up spending a year out of school. I learned later that an MA sometimes can hurt your file, they put MA applications in a nice (little) separate pile. In best case scenario your new found professors will write stellar letters for you but you are still in that pile: you can only hope that the added value is more than the substraced(but definitely not for big jumps). This fall I will be back to school and I do not feel sad any more that I did not get into top 1 choice.I also made incredible friends and I fully utilized the resources the school offered, joined sport teams, clubs and I spent two very happy years there. If I understand you well you got some nice phD offers with the embracing hands of departments who really want to train you, would make a commitment for five years and would help you in several ways. When people are suggesting to take these offers I doubt they want to hurt you or question your abilities. They just probably have an idea how difficult is grad life without departmental 5 years commitment, in insecuriy even if you are (and why would anybody question this?) really exceptional.

[TDBank]

Several facts to straighten out here:

1. recent hires at Madison who do work relevant to the poster's interests (like Herrera) are not quants.

2. Ethan BDM is at the Harris School at Chicago and has nothing to do with the poli sci department in terms of teaching or advising. Few of the comparativists at Chicago do quant work (Simpser will not be around after next year)

3. comparative at Yale is not fully quant - it is split: Kalyvas, Darden, and Wood do mostly qualitative work, while Scheve, Dunning, etc. are quants.

Most importantly, you should NOT make this decision based on methodological preferences: you should go to the school where the faculty work on topics of interest to you. I don't know who the Russia/post-Soviet person is at Chicago, so it seems to me like your choice is between Gelbach and Herrera at Madison and Darden at the MA at Yale. I'd choose Madison, but that's just me.

Penelope Higgins definitely got the facts better than I did. Maybe I should've pointed out before I gave my advice that I'm not a comparativist and I know next to nothing about non-quantative comparative politics. By and large, I do stand by my basic thesis though: virtually every major political science department is becoming more quantitative, and most are already more quantitative than qualitative at this point. Yale, Chicago, UW-Madison are not exceptions to that rule.

I agree with PH's view that one should not make a decision based on methodolical preferences, but my reason for this is somewhat different: an incoming PhD student now can assume that her methodology of choice will most likely be quantitative if only for pragmatic reasons, and she can also be confident that her choice will be accommodated regardless of where she ends up going.

I don't think a PhD applicant should make her decision primarily based on subfields of interest. I say, go to the best department overall, take a core course in each of the major subfields, and then decide. First, it's a good thing in and of itself for a political scientist to be reasonably well-versed in all major subfields of political science. Second, the borders separating subfields are becoming more porous everyday.

The stories about how MA students are treated like second-class citizens are basically true, and everybody should be well aware of that. But I don't think that should deter most people from considering a fully-funded MA for reasons I wrote in my last post. And last but not least, if a department has admitted you to their PhD program once, they can likely admit you again in the year after, especially given that your profile has been further strengthened by an MA (you just need to convince them that this time around, you're serious about staying with them for 5 years). In that sense, the opportunity cost of doing a funded MA is not a PhD offer but only one year of time.

[SansSociety]

I think you waste your time. What will be amusing is when SOOT gets relegated to Penn State - Altoona after graduating (that is, if she ever gets admitted to a program that confers the appropriate name/geographic cachet).

What's with the nastiness on this board? I don't know why people have the incentive to burn bridges at this point in the game. People like SOOT are your potential colleagues....

Edited March 29, 2010 by SansSociety

[Shere Khan]

What's with the nastiness on this board? I don't know why people have the incentive to burn bridges at this point in the game. People like SOOT are your potential colleagues....

Well, I've seen the whole story unfold here in the gradcafe and on the PSJR board, so I assume that some people just got a bit emotional or tired of leading the same discussion again and again (but then nobody forces people to get involved in the discussion, no?). Anyway, as far as I can tell, SOOT, you've made up your mind: You want to do the MA at Yale (I am deducing that from the fact that you always contradict those posts who suggest that you take the PhD, but never those that support Yale). So you know what you want and you would like this board and others to support your decision. Well, not everybody does, and those that don't won't change their minds anytime soon. So I'd suggest you do what you feel is right. In the long run it is probably not going to make a big difference anyway. You've managed to get into great PhD programs this year, you'll presumably be able to do that again, and money does not seem to be an issue. So if you feel that the MA at Yale is the right thing for you to do, go ahead.