Profile Evaluation

[afas103]

Hey sorry to be the newbie, asking about their stats.  I have been preparing my application for the next cycle early because of all the virus stuff. I was hoping some one may have some general advice for me. Here are my stats.

Public School top 50ish, BA Political Science (3.85) BS Physics(3.2) 3.6 GPA

special coures: calc 3, diff eq, honors quantum, honors electro magnetism, two r/stats political methodology classes, three other stats classes

NSF Fellowship leading to a co authorship on a paper in resilience decision making will soon be published in a pretty decent journal, helped a professor program a R/mathematica Bootstrap monte Carol simulation, and helped with some black transnationalism research. 

GRE 159V, 165Q 4.0 AWS

Coached and did Debate through college, have programmed a couple apps and websites

Studied Chinese at a university in China for a semester after college had to flee though because of the coronavirus. I'm somewhere between hsk 4 and hsk 5 right now.

I have a writing sample I could go with, but I am thinking about writing a new one because I have the time and so its more relevant to what I want to study.

Should I maybe retake the GRE? I wanted a 167 on the Quant would that be worth it? Also the writing section was pretty low.

I only have one great letter from the NSF, one good letter from another professor at the NSF project, and one just from a professor I took a couple of classes with. 

Any advice or anything else i could do in the next seven months to prepare for the applications?  What do my chances look like for top 10, top 5, top 3 programs.  I don't know too much about the process.  I would appreciate any feedback anyone could give me

[uncle_socks]

If you want to be a solid candidate for a top 10 program, you're going to want to retake the GRE. Your quant is actually fine (higher can only help though), but your verbal is a little low. Averages for verbal are often around 163-165 (Duke and UCSD publishes these iirc) and a substantial amount of people getting into top programs (especially top 3) have a 170V. Not that a 170 is a necessity or anything, but you should try to get it up a couple of points, especially because your GPA isn't the highest. 

Research experience is good and will help in admissions, though it's not a "hook" or anything. 

Tbh it's really going to come down to how good your writing sample is, how good your recs are, how good your statement of purpose is, and your fit with departments, all of which we can't really say much about on the forum. 

[Paulcg87]

16 minutes ago, afas103 said:

 What do my chances look like for top 10, top 5, top 3 programs.  I don't know too much about the process.  I would appreciate any feedback anyone could give me

Your quant is 86th percentile which is good for most social science graduate programs outside of econ. Not sure it's necessary to focus too much on raising your quant score; you already have the math from your STEM background and it will be extremely valuable given the quantitative rigour of most top US polisci PhD programs. Having R experience already from undergrad is also very beneficial given how integral this is in most US graduate polisci curricula. From what I've seen and depending on the school/program, many polisci grad students will have come from social science/liberal arts backgrounds, not STEM, with little or no R/programming knowledge, so you have a lot you could potentially contribute to a PhD cohort. 

If you have your heart set on a top 10 PhD program in political science specifically, consider re-taking the GRE and focusing more on the verbal reasoning and AW to make your stats more well rounded. Focus particularly on raising your AW score since it's 57th percentile and you're applying for a social science degree. Your undergrad polisci GPA is good and most departments take into consideration that STEM degrees tend to be more difficult to get A's in, particularly physics, so don't worry too much about that disparity. 

I think you've got a good chance at multiple top 10 programs if you can bring your VR/AW scores up, given your background. The US top 10 program I got my master's in (polisci) is very quant-focused and there were quite a few people with backgrounds similar to yours who had similar dual STEM/social science degrees. Having this type of diverse background can be a very valuable skill set later on, particularly depending on the type of research you choose to do. What I would also recommend is that you get a better idea of what you want to do specifically and then start looking at fit. Fit is so important. Next to your scores/stats, fit can make or break your application. Find a department and a faculty member (or a few) who are a good fit with your own research interests and personality and then pursue that. Remember, this is a degree that will take up half a decade or more, and a career that will span at least a few decades, so find something you are passionate about and find a place you really want to be for a while. 

[munch22]

Your verbal scores are good enough for top 20/top 10, especially with your math background. Focus on your SOP and writing sample. 

[secondarydefinitions]

Assuming the monetary cost isn't a barrier, there's no downside to retaking the GRE. Based on the information you've provided, your focus would be more quant-based? In that case, raising your GRE Q would helpful, particularly for the very top programs. The percentile of your verbal score is solid and (I think) you're quant-focused, but it could be helpful to bump your verbal as well. From what I gather, AW is not particularly important. It could be helpful to hit 4.5, but an undesirable AW score can likely be negated by a good writing sample.

[secondarydefinitions]

6 hours ago, BunniesInSpace said:

If you want to be a solid candidate for a top 10 program, you're going to want to retake the GRE. Your quant is actually fine (higher can only help though), but your verbal is a little low. Averages for verbal are often around 163-165 (Duke and UCSD publishes these iirc) and a substantial amount of people getting into top programs (especially top 3) have a 170V. Not that a 170 is a necessity or anything, but you should try to get it up a couple of points, especially because your GPA isn't the highest. 

Research experience is good and will help in admissions, though it's not a "hook" or anything. 

Tbh it's really going to come down to how good your writing sample is, how good your recs are, how good your statement of purpose is, and your fit with departments, all of which we can't really say much about on the forum. 

If I may...

Define 'substantial'. If the averages hover around 163-165, that's hard to square with a 'substantial' number of people having a 170V. Perhaps for the very top programs, the averages are higher. I'd think the very top programs have a 'substantial' number coming in a 167V+, but not 170V. 

Edited May 10, 2020 by secondarydefinitions

[uncle_socks]

1 hour ago, secondarydefinitions said:

If I may...

Define 'substantial'. If the averages hover around 163-165, that's hard to square with a 'substantial' number of people having a 170V. Perhaps for the very top programs, the averages are higher. I'd think the very top programs have a 'substantial' number coming in a 167V+, but not 170V. 

I mean it varies by program. But if UCSD and Duke are about 165 on average, then places like HPS are going to be a little higher. Anecdotally I know a sizable amount (maybe 20-30% of non-theory people) of people at one of these programs in a cohort have 169 or 170 on at least one section (and honestly I mostly meant with respect to the top 3). Plus a bunch of theorists end up at all of these top programs and they are super good at verbal.