Cornell

[polisciphd]

The odd thing is that I have dual competing interests, which of course I didn't note in my SOP (it would have made me look indecisive!) I did a lot of 'security' as an undergrad and, to be very honest, became pretty disenchanted with IR and security; in particular I feel strongly that, over the course of the last twenty years, the field has been driven by 'grand theorizing' rather than empiricism. Given this, I moved towards IPE and comparative (my honors thesis was on regional financial cooperation in East Asia following the financial crisis). In particular, integration and cooperation. On the comparative end, I'm interested in governance and foreign aid dependency (I'm currently working with a Prof. on this).

The one thing that I was really worried about when applying to Cornell and Michigan to do East Asia Security stuff is that they are widely regarded as places where you will learn to espouse grand rhetoric but without much in the way of empirical training, let alone practical application. My background, on the other hand, is entirely practical, with very little in terms of "theory" per se. I went to the Elliott School for my masters in Security Studies, focused on East Asia, which is much more "policy" focused than theoretical. So I didn't know if I would be a good fit at either place, both in terms of them liking me or me liking them...

[spin]

The one thing that I was really worried about when applying to Cornell and Michigan to do East Asia Security stuff is that they are widely regarded as places where you will learn to espouse grand rhetoric but without much in the way of empirical training, let alone practical application. My background, on the other hand, is entirely practical, with very little in terms of "theory" per se. I went to the Elliott School for my masters in Security Studies, focused on East Asia, which is much more "policy" focused than theoretical. So I didn't know if I would be a good fit at either place, both in terms of them liking me or me liking them...

Regarding Michigan, as you may know, the program is very quantitative and empirically rigorous. While you'll do the "theory," you'll also do lots of stat models, game theory, etc. Cornell, in contrast, is not so rigorous. I believe that you can learn the subsantive stuff anywhere (policy etc) but you should go to school that teaches you how to conduct rigorous social science research. While 'quant' has its limits, it's important to learn how to do and understand the stuff.

The 'grand theorizing' I was alluding to was in reference to the 'realism, liberalism, constructivism' debate in IR security; as you know the sub-field is undergoing a tremendous transformation and is moving far far away from that stuff.

[polisciphd]

Confirming what was speculated earlier, Tina Slater responded to my email inquiry saying that all acceptances have been contacted. She did say that she put the rejection letters in the mail today.

I am really bummed, Cornell was my #1 pick, and thought that I was a perfect fit for their program. Guess I was wrong.

[mburgh]

Thanks for the info, tidefan. Without an official rejection, I had started to convince myself that maybe my acceptance (or even waitlisted) email was forthcoming. I guess it's good to at least know, right? Right?!?! (I know, it doesn't feel so good to me, either).