2021-2022 Application Thread

[uncle_socks]

20 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

This is wrong. There's a a lot of empirical research on how GRE does not correlate with success or ability. 

Virtually all of this research has a selection problem and is (mathematically) biased and causally useless. Additionally, while polisci encompasses both ends of the verbal-math spectrum with theorists on one side and methodologists on the other, the modal student studies CP and needs to be well-balanced in both being able to comprehend words and understand math. These are non-negotiable skills. This is in contrast to fields where a lot of this "empirical research" on the GRE has been conducted on -- mainly science -- where practical lab work, coding, grant writing, actual science knowledge are obviously more important than reading and math. 

[PolPsychGal11]

I lurk here occasionally, and am weighing in on this because I think this is a perfect example of how prospective and current grad students often have no clue what actually happens in faculty meetings and with ad comms. I've served on admissions committees at two different R1s. In each case, we didn't give one shit about the GRE. The GRE is not predictive of your success in graduate school (much as the SAT is a poor evaluator of college success). What we care about is your past research experience, letters, and whether you fit with our program/whoever is taking students that year. Just as the SAT is a better predictor of socioeconomic class than it is of college success, the only people that care about the GRE are administrators at the Graduate College. In cases where we want to admit someone with a low GRE, we have to fill out paperwork (the extent of paperwork varies) justifying why we are taking a person with a low score. The GRE is one of those administrative hoops that we all have to deal with, but that people who are actually involved with teaching graduate students think is burdensome and useless. The GRE is not predictive of grad school success, and is a better indicator of socioeconomic status and undergraduate institution (which are also correlated) than anything else. Don't get yourselves worked up over GRE scores or if/how they matter. From the inside: we honestly don't care.

 

[sbidyanta]

As an international student who studied really hard for a good GRE score, this is extremely disheartening. Unlike domestic students, most of us from the Global South have very few opportunities to get research experience. Our GPA's would be lower because of archaic grading schemes, and our Letters of Recommendation are likely from people unknown in the West. That only leaves the SoP and the GRE as a level playing field (even in the former, not having access to the same mentoring opportunities with people who are familiar with American graduate system is a crutch). To hear that a high GRE scores means literally nothing is pretty sad for me personally, and I guess my chances of getting accepted anywhere is pretty much gone now. It was good knowing you all, I guess I'm stuck in my country for the rest of my life.

[PolPsychGal11]

2 minutes ago, sbidyanta said:

As an international student who studied really hard for a good GRE score, this is extremely disheartening. Unlike domestic students, most of us from the Global South have very few opportunities to get research experience. Our GPA's would be lower because of archaic grading schemes, and our Letters of Recommendation are likely from people unknown in the West. That only leaves the SoP and the GRE as a level playing field (even in the former, not having access to the same mentoring opportunities with people who are familiar with American graduate system is a crutch). To hear that a high GRE scores means literally nothing is pretty sad for me personally, and I guess my chances of getting accepted anywhere is pretty much gone now. It was good knowing you all, I guess I'm stuck in my country for the rest of my life.

@sbidyanta - I wouldn't take that as the take-away from my post. I will admit to speaking mostly of US or equivalent-based applicants. For students who have had different opportunities, the GRE can matter, especially if folks on the adcomm are less familiar with universities in the applicant's home town. In that case, a strong GRE score can be a reassurance that the applicant has the potential to succeed. I'll also say that it doesn't matter as much WHO your letter writers are, as WHAT they can say. I'd much rather read a letter from a professor who I've never heard of, but who can speak to your skills, experiences, and potential, than read a letter written by a big name who can say very little. The more detailed letters are always more valuable, regardless of the stature of the person writing them. I hope that gives you some reassurance -- the debate I was wading in on was Theory007 insisting that the GRE really does matter and doesn't suffer from the same biases and issues as other standardized tests!

 

 

[sbidyanta]

33 minutes ago, PolPsychGal11 said:

@sbidyanta - I wouldn't take that as the take-away from my post. I will admit to speaking mostly of US or equivalent-based applicants. For students who have had different opportunities, the GRE can matter, especially if folks on the adcomm are less familiar with universities in the applicant's home town. In that case, a strong GRE score can be a reassurance that the applicant has the potential to succeed. I'll also say that it doesn't matter as much WHO your letter writers are, as WHAT they can say. I'd much rather read a letter from a professor who I've never heard of, but who can speak to your skills, experiences, and potential, than read a letter written by a big name who can say very little. The more detailed letters are always more valuable, regardless of the stature of the person writing them. I hope that gives you some reassurance -- the debate I was wading in on was Theory007 insisting that the GRE really does matter and doesn't suffer from the same biases and issues as other standardized tests!

 

 

Ah thank you so much! That definitely helps me a lot. 

[Not_A_Crook]

Some say it do, some it don't....They just might but maybe they won't.....Good luck and Merry Christmas to all regardless of how you feel about the GRE

Edited December 22, 2021 by Not_A_Crook

[Theory007]

Since you say you are responding to what I said, please allow me to respond. All I ever said was the following:

1. The GRE is a predictor of success in graduate school
2. If people disagree with this claim they have to present evidence against it
3. The supposed evidence presented in the one post I responded to did not constitute evidence

And then the conversation turned nasty. 

Now, one thing I did not say a word about is how adcoms actually admit students - because it is an entirely separate question. I clearly have no idea what goes on in the minds of people who admit and deny students, and I never claimed that I did. All I said was that higher GRE scores correlate with better performance in graduate school and this still seems very hard to deny.

Consider the admission statistics for UCSD (and virtually every outstanding program will show something similar):

https://polisci.ucsd.edu/grad/prospective-students/admissions-statistics.html

It's clearly a top-program that admits students with very high GRE scores. How can this be?

Either

1. All applicants have high GRE scores such that students are surely not admitted because of their GRE scores. Or
2. The admission committee selects students on the basis of high GRE scores. Or
3. The admission committee selects whoever is deemed most capable or better suited for the department.

It's clear that 1 is false; there is a ton of variability in GRE scores and clearly not everyone can be in the 90th percentile of the verbal portion of the test for example. I think 2 is probably true for some programs. It is at least true that there are some places that use the GRE to distinguish between otherwise similar candidates. 3 is - in my view - most likely to be true. Adcoms select the overall best students (most likely to succeed) and they happen to have higher GRE scores on average. And this is my point: GRE scores correlate with performance. At the very least one cannot deny that higher GRE scores correlate with a higher probability of admission to top program. That is what these admission stats show.

Now, @PolPsychGal11 you say both of the following

3 hours ago, PolPsychGal11 said:

The GRE is not predictive of your success

3 hours ago, PolPsychGal11 said:

the GRE can matter... a strong GRE score can be a reassurance that the applicant has the potential to succeed.

In effect, it sounds like you are saying that when it is hard to evaluate a candidate's credentials, adcoms do in fact look at and take the GRE seriously. But if the GRE does not predict success (per your first statement above) why would anyone consider the GREs at all? i.e. how would it help to discriminate among certain international applicants? It sounds to me as if you think that the GRE does in fact correlate with success in grad school (or at least that adcoms do consider GRE scores) but when students can demonstrate their potential in other ways, adcoms tend to look at those other things. Or am I getting something wrong? Either way, this is exactly my point: GRE scores do correlate with grad school success, which is why you and I agree that @sbidyanta should keep his/her hopes up!

Just to be clear: do not mean any of what I say above in a combative manner. I am simply very interested in this stuff.

[LatinAmericanFootball]

I mean, just to name a couple, professors at Columbia and NYU mention on their "Advice for prospective PhD students" pages that GREs are very important for admissions - see http://macartan.nyc/teaching/applying-for-a-phd/ and https://cyrussamii.com/?page_id=2121. The faculty present at Stanford's "Pathways to PhD" informational session also said the same. So that's three top departments saying GREs definitely matter, even if just for an initial screening of the candidates or whatever.

I have my doubts on whether it is predictive of future success and there certainly are cultural biases - the verbal section was particularly difficult for me as a foreigner and it hardly speaks anything of my ability to read and interpret the PS literature. But scores seem to matter for most departments.

[sbidyanta]

Since we have some people in this thread who are already enrolled in their PhD programs, can anyone give me the syllabus or reading list for their quantitative methods courses? My quant training hitherto has been pretty abysmal, and I'd like to do some catch up. 

[honeymoow]

1 hour ago, sbidyanta said:

Since we have some people in this thread who are already enrolled in their PhD programs, can anyone give me the syllabus or reading list for their quantitative methods courses? My quant training hitherto has been pretty abysmal, and I'd like to do some catch up. 

GOV 2001 @ Harvard will be quite helpful in this regard.

[sbidyanta]

6 minutes ago, honeymoow said:

GOV 2001 @ Harvard will be quite helpful in this regard.

Thank you, this is very helpful! I managed to find a youtube playlist for this course, so hopefully I can get the most out of it. 

[IAMK]

On 12/10/2021 at 4:00 AM, honeymoow said:

Just as a point of discussion, I've heard internally that there's expected to be an increase of applicants—those rejected from last year, those seeking admission ahead of the coming recession, etc. Will be interesting either way! 

What was your "internal" source? 

[honeymoow]

2 minutes ago, IAMK said:

What was your "internal" source? 

I'm an undergraduate at a top-tier program, have spoken to several senior faculty (one of whom is on the committee this year).

[IAMK]

2 minutes ago, honeymoow said:

I'm an undergraduate at a top-tier program, have spoken to several senior faculty (one of whom is on the committee this year).

Thank you. I hope that it is only your program's situation... 

[sbidyanta]

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays everyone!!

[honeymoow]

So, a couple more weeks until programs generally start releasing results?

[Theory007]

On 12/22/2021 at 11:53 AM, Theory007 said:

@MrsPhD

I'm okay with downvotes but if you disagree with what I say why don't you join the conversation and let me know why? I have not been disrespectful in any way but simply relayed some kind of argument in response to what someone else said earlier.

[Gryffindor50points]

Hi guys,

 

does anyone know what the expected results timeline is for the programs they applied for?

[polisciboy]

@Gryffindor50points there's a post about this here: 

 

[polisciboy]

I have a few questions about interviews in case anyone knows.

1. How common are they? I know some schools don't interview before sending acceptance but, like, what's the percentage that do? Do top schools interview more than lower?
2. How important are they for admission? Someone told me that interviews are actually where the candidate has leverage to negotiate TA/RA positions, salary, etc. but I don't know if that's true everywhere.
3. Does anyone know of materials that can help prepare for these interviews? Couldn't find anything useful in my initial google search so I thought I would ask here in case there's something obvious I'm missing.

[Gryffindor50points]

35 minutes ago, polisciboy said:

@Gryffindor50points there's a post about this here: 

 

Thanks, that was helpful

[MrsPhD]

17 hours ago, Theory007 said:

I'm okay with downvotes but if you disagree with what I say why don't you join the conversation and let me know why? I have not been disrespectful in any way but simply relayed some kind of argument in response to what someone else said earlier.

Several people here, including me, have said a lot of times that GRE score is not a good predictor of success in graduate school and there is not a strong causal link and yet, you keep saying that there is a correlation. You also say that WE should provide citations. You can make a simple google scholar search.

Why don't YOU provide a literature review on your case, though? Your counter-argument is that we should provide the evidence rather than you?

You are the type of person that just wants to be right for the sake of being right. I can already tell you that this is a bad attitude, particularly for graduate school. The discipline is moving to co-authorship and if you are like this, you are going to alienate all of the other graduate students, who are your pool of coauthors.

Have you even been in committee for deciding grad applications? Because I have. 

Edited January 2, 2022 by MrsPhD

[Theory007]

2 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

You also say that WE should provide citations. You can make a simple google scholar search.

Why don't YOU provide a literature review on your case, though? Your counter-argument is that we should provide the evidence rather than you?

Yes I believe you should provide the evidence because you are the one presenting an extraordinary claim. The GRE has been the standard for grad admissions since the 1930s (I believe) so whether you like it or not it is on you to prove that everyone was wrong all these years. This is why I don't think I need to present any evidence but you do.

3 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

Several people here, including me, have said a lot of times that GRE score is not a good predictor of success in graduate school and there is not a strong causal link and yet, you keep saying that there is a correlation.

Why does it matter that several people seems to disagree with me?

Why don't you engage with the perfectly coherent response I gave to PolPsychGal11? It is so easy to attack me or claim that I am wrong because several of you disagree with me.

I have absolutely never ever said that there was a causal link between the GRE score and grad school success. Never. I have said that there is a correlation between a high GRE score and grad school success and there is absolutely no doubt about that. I'm not trying to rile you up further but if you disagree with this you should re-think what it means for something to be correlated (in a technical sense). I say this not in a mean-spirited way but because I think it may clarify what I do and do not think.

2 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

You are the type of person that just wants to be right for the sake of being right.

You don't know me, and I am actually not the type of person you describe. You may have guessed that I study political theory so to me it is all about the argument. I am fully open to anything someone else might say and my general attitude is to solicit different opinions in order to accurately hone my own. But you have made your mind up about me have you not?

2 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

I can already tell you that this is a bad attitude, particularly for graduate school. The discipline is moving to co-authorship and if you are like this, you are going to alienate all of the other graduate students, who are your pool of coauthors.

You still don't know me but it might please you to know that I have a great working relationship with people in my department. We are all direct with one another in an intense and rewarding environment. You are right that I am not co-authoring (and not interested in it either) but just got my second sole-authored publication out, which I am clearly very happy about.

3 hours ago, MrsPhD said:

Have you even been in committee for deciding grad applications? Because I have. 

Yep I was on the committee last year and will be on it again this year. What has your experience been like?

You strike me as mad and I just cannot understand why it is so upsetting that someone disagrees with you about the GREs and grad school success? I hope one day you will see the value in disagreement and how being confronted with people who disagree with you actually helps you - especially in academia!

I am not attacking you, making assumptions about you, or trying to denigrate you in any way. But throughout this entire conversation with you and others, the main thing I have noticed is that I try to have a respectful back-and-forth while people like you are quick to be mean-spirited, resort to personal attacks and disparage someone with a different opinion. I just find it curious that it is like this and that people simply cannot stick to the topic and present coherent thoughts. If I disagree with you, it must be because I am a terrible person. I am not simply wrong in your eyes - I am a bad person too. To me this is just a discussion about a topic I find important and interesting. I do not have any other intentions and as far as I know you are great!

I have presented my views in considerable detail in previous posts. How about - in the spirit of having a good conversation about this - you tell me what I am wrong about? I am actually genuinely interested to know - especially because no one has disputed anything I have said.

Now give me that downvote.

[Theory007]

Actually, I am beginning to think there is no point in me posting here further. Respond with a yes or upvote if I should leave the forum and I will.

[honeymoow]

I don't see the reason to claim with such absoluteness that there is absolutely *no* consideration of the GRE in admissions, and that the exam is wholly and completely disregarded. If that were the case, many top programs wouldn't still require it; many wouldn't have switched from *not* requiring it during the pandemic to requiring it again; and all of the faculty that I have spoken to—all of whom are tenured, have served on the committee many times, and would not resort to cursing at applicants on this forum—claim that the GRE is still very heavily considered. So, while your own personal anecdote may certainly be true, I do not find it productive to make such absolutist claims, especially given the opaqueness of the application process, including to those on the relevant committee.

Edited January 4, 2022 by honeymoow