Higher Ranking Versus Better Fit

[redwoodgal]

Hi everyone. It's nearing April 15th and I need help.

School A is 5 spots higher in rankings, subfield and general. It also has a better track record in placement.

School B has several professors I would love to work, the grad students there seemed more like me, and it's in a place I would rather live. It has a good, recognizeable but not OMG name like School A.

What should I do?

[interista]

Just my opinion.

Top 5 vs Top 10, Top 10 vs Top 15: go to the higher ranked school

Top 15 vs Top 20: toss-up

Top 20 vs Top 25 on down: go to the better fit

[Shere Khan]

Given the wide variation in rankings over time and between different ranking systems, I can't imagine that a 5 spot difference is even significant... I'd rather go with the better fit and "general feeling", unless the placement record of the second university is really abysmal.

[Ziz]

I'd second what Shere Khan said about rankings being so variable and dependant on methodology. I don't think 5 spots is a huge difference since from your description, neither school is top 10.

Remember that some of the things that affect placement have to do with the individual. If you are at a school with a great supervisor who takes a big interest in your work, you enjoy yourself there, like your fellow grad students, you are going to do better work which will help you get a job. So my advice is unless the placement at School B is really terrible, you should go there.

[someoneoutthere]

I'd second what Shere Khan said about rankings being so variable and dependant on methodology. I don't think 5 spots is a huge difference since from your description, neither school is top 10.

Remember that some of the things that affect placement have to do with the individual. If you are at a school with a great supervisor who takes a big interest in your work, you enjoy yourself there, like your fellow grad students, you are going to do better work which will help you get a job. So my advice is unless the placement at School B is really terrible, you should go there.

Agreed, but what in the OP's description indicates that neither of the schools are in the top 10? For example, UCLA has a good, recognizable name, but not an OMG name like Columbia.

Anyway, I second what the above poster says.

[mn06556]

Agreed, but what in the OP's description indicates that neither of the schools are in the top 10? For example, UCLA has a good, recognizable name, but not an OMG name like Columbia.

Anyway, I second what the above poster says.

As someone who may very well turn down some big name schools for a better-fit school and program with less general name recognition, I have to say that fit is very important. You're going to be at the school you pick for 5-6 years. When you're happy and feel supported (not necessarily even financially, mind you), you are likely to do better work. The quality and originality of the work you do, in my opinion, matters more than the name.

Furthermore, you have to differentiate between how political scientists will perceive the name and how the general public will perceive the name. We are mostly on an academic track, so our school's standing among our peer group - particularly people within our SUBFIELD that will ultimately be evaluating our work - matters more than how our friends and family will react.

My two cents.

[StudentForever]

As a current graduate student, here's my 2 cents.

It really matters about what your final plans are. If you plan to do primarily research, I'd say ranking is more important in the long run. I really can't overstate how elitist this profession is. If your final destination is a directional or (S)LAC, I'd say go with the better fit. You'll enjoy grad school more.

[Ziz]

Agreed, but what in the OP's description indicates that neither of the schools are in the top 10? For example, UCLA has a good, recognizable name, but not an OMG name like Columbia.

Anyway, I second what the above poster says.

Sorry, you're right. I just assumed he would have said they were. My bad.

[lorinho]

Just some food for thought. In general, name recognition of schools doesn't change dramatically over time. Top schools in rankings might, but the famous names are still the famous names, and while it shouldn't matter, it does to the snobs. However, student bodies and faculties could change dramatically over short periods of time, and that is not only unpredictable but completely out of the students control. In a 5-9 year program it seems sure that almost all of the student body and some of the faculty will change, but it is unlikely that the OMG school will get a bad rep, while the somewhat well know school will suddenly become world famous.

That said, there are plenty of reasons to disregard, or not consider heavily, the rankings and reputation.

[Wesson]

Five places in the rankings is simply too few to matter. If you were looking at a top 10 vs a lower top 25 or a top 25 vs barely top 40, I'd encourage you to attend the higher-ranked school unless it flat-out felt wrong for you. That's because search committees often draw informal lines regarding what group of departments they'll consider seriously when looking for candidates. But these lines are fuzzy, and exceptions are made. If you feel you'll be more comfortable, better trained, more productive, and ultimately a stronger candidate by attending say #22 rather than #17, that will more than make up for the very slight gap in the rankings.

[curufinwe]

I will say the similar stuff. There are points in these rankings there you shift in quality or reputation. As long as your gap does not contain such a shift point, go to the better fit. Plus, your thesis and the recommendation you'd get from your advisors matter big time as well.

But, if you are between, say, Cornell and Davis (5 spots according to the US News), pick the higher ranking school.

[someoneoutthere]

What if you think your career will likely be more in govt and/or think tank work (and, yes, a polisci phd is still useful for these tracks)? Does name recognition then trump rep among academic circles?

[lorinho]

What if you think your career will likely be more in govt and/or think tank work (and, yes, a polisci phd is still useful for these tracks)? Does name recognition then trump rep among academic circles?

For reference, I worked in the Federal Gov't for ten years before returning to Academia, and I would say that in gov't recognition trumps academic rep a little, but neither are very important. In the DOD there are a lot of people who get MA's at American Military University, which is something like the University of Phoenix for soldiers, and wasn't even regionally accredited until recently (last 5 or so years). No one cares as long as you have the degree. Think tanks may be different, and most of the big think tank names seem to have degrees from bigger universities, but I can't speak too knowledgeably on that.

I would caution however, that in most cases, at least in gov't, PhD only becomes useful at higher levels (hence my ten years before returning) and may not be worth the cost initially, since you would more likely be competing for the same entry level jobs as people who only have MA's, unless you already have experience.