University of British Columbia: Master of Political Science

[ValeriaAM]

Hi guys! 

I recently got admitted to UBC's master's program in political science (I also got accepted into U Toronto, but their faculty is much more IR focused, whereas I'm interested in comparative).

I'm an American who chose to do her master's outside of the U.S. However, I intend to complete my Phd in Political Science in an American institution (I'm especially interested in the UC system). I wanted to know if any of you had any knowledge of the quality of social science and politics research in UBC, as well as the Canadian system all around. I really like UBC's faculty (they've also offered me funding which is great) but I'm curious as to how this institution is perceived in the U.S. when it comes to applying for PhD programs. I know competitively speaking I might be at a disadvantage compared to graduates who complete their master's at U.S. institutions. 

Thank you!!

[kestrel18]

6 hours ago, ValeriaAM said:

Hi guys! 

I recently got admitted to UBC's master's program in political science (I also got accepted into U Toronto, but their faculty is much more IR focused, whereas I'm interested in comparative).

I'm an American who chose to do her master's outside of the U.S. However, I intend to complete my Phd in Political Science in an American institution (I'm especially interested in the UC system). I wanted to know if any of you had any knowledge of the quality of social science and politics research in UBC, as well as the Canadian system all around. I really like UBC's faculty (they've also offered me funding which is great) but I'm curious as to how this institution is perceived in the U.S. when it comes to applying for PhD programs. I know competitively speaking I might be at a disadvantage compared to graduates who complete their master's at U.S. institutions. 

Thank you!!

Canadian MA POLS programs are strong. However, their grading policies are brutal (at least in Ontario). So, keep it in mind.

[Paulcg87]

11 hours ago, ValeriaAM said:

Hi guys! 

I recently got admitted to UBC's master's program in political science (I also got accepted into U Toronto, but their faculty is much more IR focused, whereas I'm interested in comparative).

I'm an American who chose to do her master's outside of the U.S. However, I intend to complete my Phd in Political Science in an American institution (I'm especially interested in the UC system). I wanted to know if any of you had any knowledge of the quality of social science and politics research in UBC, as well as the Canadian system all around. I really like UBC's faculty (they've also offered me funding which is great) but I'm curious as to how this institution is perceived in the U.S. when it comes to applying for PhD programs. I know competitively speaking I might be at a disadvantage compared to graduates who complete their master's at U.S. institutions. 

Thank you!!

@ValeriaAM - congratulations! The questions you're asking have been asked quite a few times on here recently during this application cycle; recommend you read the two separate Canadian political science threads here to get answers to all of the above. 

[ValeriaAM]

Oh ok, thank you so much!!

[yhs]

I am also in a similar situation as you. I was accepted by UBC and rejected by York MA Politics program. (Which is weird since I thought my deeper background in Marxism and critical theory would give me an edge.) However, for me it is more about picking Canadian vs. American institutions for my MA. The tuition for UBC on top of the TA bonus is really attractive, but if my plan is to stick to the academia and go to U.S. institutions for a phD, then the extra tuition may be worth investing from the perspectives of an international student. (non-American and non-Canadian.) In the U.S., I have been accepted into UChicago MAPSS, NYU, and UCLA. Their tuition are all about the 40-42k. Interestingly, it is my Asian parents (who would be the ones paying my tuition for graduate studies) who prefers the U.S. programs without any hesitation. For them the prestige the U.S. universities carries outweigh the costs. 

My undergrad background is in mathematics and philosophy, and my main concentration is political theory. Although my interests in the past year have been gravitating towards political economy over ethics. I also have a solid background in East Asian affairs, and I heard UBC is one of the strongest in regional studies.

Lemme know what you guys think~

Edited March 20, 2020 by yhs

[Paulcg87]

On 3/19/2020 at 11:09 PM, yhs said:

I am also in a similar situation as you. I was accepted by UBC and rejected by York MA Politics program. (Which is weird since I thought my deeper background in Marxism and critical theory would give me an edge.) However, for me it is more about picking Canadian vs. American institutions for my MA. The tuition for UBC on top of the TA bonus is really attractive, but if my plan is to stick to the academia and go to U.S. institutions for a phD, then the extra tuition may be worth investing from the perspectives of an international student. (non-American and non-Canadian.) In the U.S., I have been accepted into UChicago MAPSS, NYU, and UCLA. Their tuition are all about the 40-42k. Interestingly, it is my Asian parents (who would be the ones paying my tuition for graduate studies) who prefers the U.S. programs without any hesitation. For them the prestige the U.S. universities carries outweigh the costs. 

My undergrad background is in mathematics and philosophy, and my main concentration is political theory. Although my interests in the past year have been gravitating towards political economy over ethics. I also have a solid background in East Asian affairs, and I heard UBC is one of the strongest in regional studies.

Lemme know what you guys think~

Congrats on getting into some amazing programs! Keep in mind, even if UBC is offering you good money, the cost of living in Van is outrageous. Generally speaking it ranks just below Hong Kong in terms of costs. The only two situations in which I'd advise choosing a Canadian Top 3 (UBC, McGill, UToronto) are if you're Canadian and want to come home and/or if you didn't get into a US top 20 program. In your case, you have mentioned you aren't Canadian and that you did get into three US T20 programs. You've also mentioned your plan is to stick to academia and go to the US for a PhD; under these circumstances, unless none of the US programs offered you funding, I'd go to whichever US program offered you the most money.

Oh, and your parents are right about prestige when it comes to working in academia in the US; having personal experience as a Canadian working in IR in the US, name and ranking are extremely important there. Name/ranking are not nearly as important in Canada, so it was a bit of a shock to me, but the name on your degree does matter if you want a US tenure track job or the most competitive postdocs. 

Edited March 21, 2020 by Paulcg87

[yhs]

On 3/21/2020 at 2:38 PM, Paulcg87 said:

Congrats on getting into some amazing programs! Keep in mind, even if UBC is offering you good money, the cost of living in Van is outrageous. Generally speaking it ranks just below Hong Kong in terms of costs. The only two situations in which I'd advise choosing a Canadian Top 3 (UBC, McGill, UToronto) are if you're Canadian and want to come home and/or if you didn't get into a US top 20 program. In your case, you have mentioned you aren't Canadian and that you did get into three US T20 programs. You've also mentioned your plan is to stick to academia and go to the US for a PhD; under these circumstances, unless none of the US programs offered you funding, I'd go to whichever US program offered you the most money.

Oh, and your parents are right about prestige when it comes to working in academia in the US; having personal experience as a Canadian working in IR in the US, name and ranking are extremely important there. Name/ranking are not nearly as important in Canada, so it was a bit of a shock to me, but the name on your degree does matter if you want a US tenure track job or the most competitive postdocs. 

Thank you for the insightful reply. Funny enough, I am finishing my undergrad in Hong Kong and I stayed in Zurich for my exchange semester. (It seems like I am collecting the experience of living in expensive cities as if I am collecting post stamps!)  Chicago is the cheapest choice out of all my offers and it is extremely well-known for its strength in political theory, so it is definitely the safest option. I am a little worried about the reputation of the MAPSS program and the large cohort though. Its sheer size meant mentorship is limited compared to other MA programs which do a greater job of assigning students a supervisor. 

[Paulcg87]

@ValeriaAM I'm posting part of my reply to our PM convo here in the hopes it helps others, including @yhs. @Dwar feel free to chime in too with your advice, which is so helpful. 

Let me say up front that I believe that 'fit' is one of the most important factors when it comes to PhD admissions in North America. Now, this is more of a PhD thing than a master's thing, and it only applies to North America; most of the larger polisci programs admit 3-5 times more master's candidates than PhD candidates, and in Britain, even at the PhD level, the emphasis is more on grades than anything else (you won't even be considered for most Oxbridge PhD's without the equivalent of either a 1.1 or a 2.1 undergrad GPA). But back to North America, master's students are only matriculating for 1-2 years (versus 5-6 for a PhD) and a master's thesis is significantly shorter and less work than a PhD thesis, so fit isn't as much of an issue at the master's level. For PhD's, fit is so important, and it applies to both the student and the faculty supervisor. On the supervisor's side of things, they will not agree to work with someone whose research interests do not comport their own, and they might also hesitate to work with someone who they believe might not be able to get the work done, do the research, write the thesis and graduate. Additionally, from both the supervisor and student perspectives, who wants to work with someone for 5+ years who they might not get along with, personally or professionally? It's a long time to spend stuck with someone if you don't like them personally or if you don't like the research that they/you are doing. 

So, in terms of lessons learned and advice I can give, I recommend you do some serious research into the faculty at prospective PhD programs you are interested in. Find faculty who specialize in the research areas you are interested in. Email them and ask them about their research, tell them your interests and ask if they are going to be accepting new PhD students for supervision for your application cycle/year. Consider even going to visit their departments and meeting with them in person. Some schools discourage this, but most are either indifferent or welcome the initiative, and I've had incredible success being this proactive, as have my friends/coworkers/classmates who have done this. Be persistent and proactive in reaching out to potential faculty. Have a CV ready, your best writing sample, and at least a 1 paragraph description of your broader research interests. WARNING: Be careful with stating your research interests to potential PhD supervisors. My experience has been that some professors love specificity and welcome potential candidates who know exactly what they want to do, while others dislike this approach at the pre-PhD phase and think that specificity is a bad thing. It's a mixed bag and personally I have had success and failures trying both (broad vs. specific interests).

Personally, I believe you are better off by stating your broader interests (e.g., liberalism, security in the Asia-Pacific region, EU politics, refugee rights, counterterrorism, etc) than really specific interests (" a comparative analysis of 1990's bilateral investment treaty negotiation strategies among southern MERCOSUR states") when you first contact a potential supervisor. The latter type of specificity is actually preferred outside of North America, particularly in the UK (where you need to have a very specific 3000-5000 word research proposal submitted with your PhD application to Oxford/Cambridge), but not so much here, where both US and Canadian PhD programs realize and expect that while your broader research interests should remain relatively the same, your specific research focus/direction will probably change a year or two into the program. Now, with all of this being said, every potential PhD supervisor is different, so it's always going to be hit or miss when you contact them. Some will respond, some will not; some will engage you and ask you for a CV and then write you off after they see your background/degree(s), others will take a sincere interest in you and if they do, an even smaller number will remember you and possibly want to meet with you or talk to you before/during the application cycle, and among those, you might get one or a few who will support your application during the adcom review, and if they do, it will mean more for your application than your grades, GRE scores, references, CV, writing sample, the name on your degrees, or your extracurricular activities. 

So, fit aside, the other things mentioned at the end of the last paragraph are of course very important too. American universities place a huge emphasis on GRE scores, grades and references. For US top 20 schools, you can get in without having a professor on your side who is supporting your application, but if you're going to get in just based on your application, you darn well better have good grades, GRE scores and references. Also keep in mind that if you are lacking in one area (maybe you have good grades but average GRE verbal/quant scores or mediocre references), you can sometimes offset this and compensate for it with an absolutely stellar background/EC's. For example, let's say you do alright on the GRE but not 90th percentiles, but you have 3-5 years of applicable experience in IR research, diplomacy, military deployments, or another field closely related to political science, and your references reflect and support/corroborate this.

If your other stats are good (good grades, good writing sample), I have personally seen this work for multiple former colleagues and classmates who got into even US top 10 programs, including two of the PhD students in the T10 program I attended in the US for my master's degree. One of the two was prior service military with a few deployments to the middle east who was studying counterterrorism, and the other was a former foreign diplomat who worked as a trade representative/advisor representing their country for a few years abroad and then decided to go into academia. Both of these people on paper should not have gotten into a US T10 PhD program just based on their GRE scores, but their backgrounds and experience compensated for other deficits. So, what I'm saying is, if you have your heart set on a US T20 and you can't raise your GRE scores or you have undergrad grades you can't change, I recommend you go get some pertinent, applicable work experience for a few years and distinguish yourself. It's the only way to overcome other things you can't change if you really want to go to a top PhD program in the US. 

I hope this helps any aspiring PhD students coming from Canada or otherwise non-Americans who might not know this.

Edited March 22, 2020 by Paulcg87

[Dwar]

1 hour ago, Paulcg87 said:

Let me say up front that I believe that 'fit' is one of the most important factors when it comes to PhD admissions in North America. Now, this is more of a PhD thing than a master's thing, and it only applies to North America; most of the larger polisci programs admit 3-5 times more master's candidates than PhD candidates, and in Britain, even at the PhD level, the emphasis is more on grades than anything else (you won't even be considered for most Oxbridge PhD's without the equivalent of either a 1.1 or a 2.1 undergrad GPA). But back to North America, master's students are only matriculating for 1-2 years (versus 5-6 for a PhD) and a master's thesis is significantly shorter and less work than a PhD thesis, so fit isn't as much of an issue at the master's level. For PhD's, fit is so important, and it applies to both the student and the faculty supervisor. On the supervisor's side of things, they will not agree to work with someone whose research interests do not comport their own, and they might also hesitate to work with someone who they believe might not be able to get the work done, do the research, write the thesis and graduate. Additionally, from both the supervisor and student perspectives, who wants to work with someone for 5+ years who they might not get along with, personally or professionally? It's a long time to spend stuck with someone if you don't like them personally or if you don't like the research that they/you are doing. 

 

Just want to chime in and say that I agree with this statement and that fit is in my opinion one of the most important things. An applicant can have the best scores and grades possible and still get all rejections if they do not have great fit with a department.