Poli Sci fall PHD admit - Chances?

[blackcoffee64]

Hey guys, this another necrotic, perfectionist, anxious, self indulging-post about chances getting into grad school programs. I am applying for a PHD for Poli Sci (IR and IPE), and my research interests are in the political economy of global governance and financial regulatory consensus.

I come from a state school but I'm in the honors college there with some well known faculty (presidents of various international studies associations) who wrote my recommendations.

I speak advanced mandarin and have worked/studied/volunteered in China and Vietnam several times in my undergraduate career, and have done a lot of independent study (competing for well known grants /presenting at well known conference this april).

I believe I have linked my research interests with the professors pretty well, mostly in political economy and global governance, as well as comparative economic development (my research in China was on gentrification and is going to be published next year).

GPA: 3.9

GRE: 164 Verbal / 157 Math (yeah i know) 5.5 Writing

Writing sample and personal statements I believe are good if not impressive.

Any idea on chances for the following schools for a fall phd admit?

Columbia

UCSD

Yale

Harvard

Uni Mich

UC Berkeley

Columbia

Princeton

Uni Washington - Seattle

Stanford

[Secret Squirrel]

I feel like a jackass for doing this, but it's kinda funny: I've never before met a necrotic perfectionist.

As for your chances, I don't know much aside from what I've read on here, but your Q might hurt you but if they can get past that, then you have a strong profile. Do you have much research experience? When you say published, what do you mean?

Edited December 17, 2011 by Secret Squirrel

[blackcoffee64]

a few independent research projects, quantitative work in China ( applies for Fulbright for funding for further work)

[blackcoffee64]

publishing honors thesis in graduate/undergraduate journal

[CookieJar]

GPA is great; GRE a bit weak. I think it all depends on fit and your writing sample then.

[blackcoffee64]

Had some good news today, got recommended for a Fulbright by the IIE

[Tufnel]

Though I don't know the new GRE scale well, the above posters are likely correct concerning your Q score. This is especially true given your interests. If you want to do IPE/finance, you need to demonstrate aptitude in math. Did you take a methods sequence in undergrad? Any math courses? Stats?

If you apply to study a methods-heavy subfield with a low Q score, you need to prove you can hack it in a methods sequence. My perception is that you can get in with a low GRE if you have either great pedigree or extensive training in math-centric courses (and did well in those courses). If Kosuke Imai says you're ready for grad school, many (most?) adcoms will overlook a low Q. They will view strong performance in a rigorous econometrics sequence similarly.

It sounds like you're in good shape if this season goes poorly. Should you receive less than favorable decisions, you can wait it out a year while doing a Fulbright (which is a great opportunity - congratulations). If that case actualizes, I suggest you apply to different schools.

First, you may want to consider schools in the 10-20 range. Your present list is essentially the top 10 plus one safety. There are many excellent schools that have a lower overall ranking but that nonetheless would be better fits for your interests. If I were you, I'd look into Wisconsin, OSU, and Illinois. Though ranked somewhat lower, Emory might be a good fit for you.

Second, I suggest you remove some of the schools on your list. Who would you work with at Berkeley? For all practical intents, they don't have an IR program. Yale? Scheve is fantastic but that's about it for IPE. Plus, he doesn't really do finance. With your interests, I'd rather be at Wisconsin than Berkeley.

Third, I'd diversify. In my opinion, applying to a large set of peer schools adds little utility. The top schools generally admit the same group of people. If you're rejected at Columbia, Princeton, and UCSD, you're probably not going to get in at Yale, Michigan, Stanford, or Harvard. I haven't met anyone that was accepted to one school in the top 10 and rejected by 8 others. Thus, my advice is to apply to a few schools from the very top, a few schools from just below that, then a few below that, etc., until you are applying to schools at which you have a high probability of acceptance. At present, there's only one such school on your list.

Here's an example list:

Harvard

Princeton

UMich

UCSD

UCLA

Wisconsin

OSU

Illinois

Emory

Washington

TA&M

Don't use that list as I haven't seen your application. The list is intended to be an example. You very well may receive an acceptance from a top school. A list like the one above preserves that possiblity without seriously diminishing its likelihood. However, it also improves your set of potential outcomes conditional on rejection at top schools.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions. I attend one of the schools to which you're applying and have similar interests.

Best of luck!

Edited January 20, 2012 by Tufnel

[blackcoffee64]

I appreciate the feedback.

Concerning your remarks on methods, I've taken two graduate seminars in statistics methodology (both A's) and am currently applying a lot of regression and co-variable analysis in a paper that i'm presenting at a conference soon.

I think I did fill the application pool with too many top tens as you said, but my research interests did meet those of the programs' professors.

If I do get the Fulbright, I will go on and finish that paper (it's heavily statistics based) and use that as my writing sample for a second round.

I honestly have accepted I probably won't get in anywhere, but wanted to put my head out there while I could (was way too busy finishing honors thesis and working a job to take the GRE again).

[Tufnel]

I appreciate the feedback.

Concerning your remarks on methods...

That sounds like a good background. Without knowing the details of your application (who wrote your letters, where you went to school, etc), I think you have a realistic chance this season. Plus, you have a pretty fantastic worst case scenario.

Best of luck. And seriously feel free to get in touch if you have any specific questions.

[whirlibird]

I'm in the same application cycle, so an evaluation from me would mean little to nothing, but Tufnel's advice sounds golden to me. But I did want to comment on a couple of things.

First thing, I'm also presenting at a well-known conference in April...is the same conference? Is it in San Diego? I'm all curious.

Second thing, Fulbright=100% worth it. I'm doing one right now, and it, more than anything, has allowed me to really solidify my career goals, research interests, and generally gain a multitude of valuable and wonderful experiences and skills. So, if you do get into some awesome programs, see which ones you might be able to defer, but reach for that Fulbright. My two cents anyway. Wish you the best of luck with everything!

[Secret Squirrel]

There are things that might override a Fulbright, though. My significant other was unable to get a visa to go to Finland, so I turned down my Fulbright. I haven't regretted it and now I can say "I turned down a Fulbright", which just sounds bad ass.

[potbellypete]

Don't sell yourself short on the math GRE score. I thought a 157 is about equivalent to a 700, isn't it?

[blackcoffee64]

I'm in the same application cycle, so an evaluation from me would mean little to nothing, but Tufnel's advice sounds golden to me. But I did want to comment on a couple of things.

First thing, I'm also presenting at a well-known conference in April...is the same conference? Is it in San Diego? I'm all curious.

Second thing, Fulbright=100% worth it. I'm doing one right now, and it, more than anything, has allowed me to really solidify my career goals, research interests, and generally gain a multitude of valuable and wonderful experiences and skills. So, if you do get into some awesome programs, see which ones you might be able to defer, but reach for that Fulbright. My two cents anyway. Wish you the best of luck with everything!

Nope mines in Chicago, would be great to go to west coast...I actually need to register for it asap!

Thanks for advice on fulbright, I feel like it would be a great way to solidify my interests, as well as go back to a country I loved living in!

[grantman]

I am also going to that conference in Chicago, if my quess is correct, and I am much looking forward to it.

Furthermore, I would serious think about doing the Fulbright because not only are able to go abroad for one year, you will be able to network with some great individuals which may be useful if you write a dissertation that focuses on China.

But anyway the best of luck to you!

[RWBG]

MPSA, right? I'd say see you guys there, but with thousands of people at the conference, that seems statistically unlikely.

[edost]

You're necrotic? You should really see a doctor about that. Or a coroner.

As for your chances: it's all about research fit, less about the stats.

[grantman]

MPSA, right? I'd say see you guys there, but with thousands of people at the conference, that seems statistically unlikely.

Yep, MPSA. I am only presenting a poster, but hey I get funding from my department either way.

[Tufnel]

You're necrotic? You should really see a doctor about that. Or a coroner.

As for your chances: it's all about research fit, less about the stats.

Among top programs, I think research "fit" is less important than many think. Big programs have someone working on nearly every major issue. Sure, schools vary in their strength across areas. However, one could conduct research on any reasonably good question at HYPS. As faculty size becomes smaller, "fit" becomes more determinative.

Basically, the ability to conduct one's intended research at a university is generally necessary for admission into that university. That doesn't mean that admission is "all about fit."

Stats become an incredibly important tool for filtering. Admissions committees aren't going to look at every file closely when they have a pool of 700 applications. It's convenient to filter on quantitative indicators and many departments do just that when making admissions decisions. You're hurting yourself if you don't take the stats portion of your application seriously.

In short, "stats" won't get you in but they might keep you out.

Most importantly, I laughed at your comments about OP's (likely false) self-diagnosed necrosis.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Tufnel

[hupr]

Among top programs, I think research "fit" is less important than many think.

I think this is right on. I remember seeing folks getting offers from several top departments that have very different ways of doing political science and very different strengths. There are so many applicants to places like Harvard, Princeton and Yale that they can afford to make offers to mostly people with pedigrees from peer schools, which is one way of whittling down the applicant list. In other words, fit isn't nearly as important at that level as it is for schools in the 10-30 range.

This is not to say that you shouldn't apply to those schools, but unless you've got the right background (and these days, even then), putting all of your eggs in that basket is a pretty risky bet.

[blackcoffee64]

Yep I think my final GRE scores come out as 720 verbal 720 math, 5.5 Writing...I am risking a lot with putting all of my eggs in the top 10/20 basket. If I don't get an acceptance this semester i'll shoot for lower tiered next year, no worries. Thanks for the advice everyone!

[brent09]

Don't sell yourself short on the math GRE score. I thought a 157 is about equivalent to a 700, isn't it?

Yea, I kind of thought increasing the GRE gave diminishing returns (i.e., going from 650-700 pays higher dividends than going from 700-750, et cetera). Might be wrong, but I wouldn't imagine a 720 is disqualifying. Sure, we would all prefer an 800, but if you're clearing the 700-level the rest is just gravy.

Could be wrong, though.

addendum: Not to mention that several good programs (Duke, UNC) publish admissions statistics, and their average GREs for admits are ~700 v/q. Not ridiculously high. I'm sure CHYMPS are a bit higher, but 720 is surely in the range of candidates they regularly admit...

Edited January 28, 2012 by brent09

[RWBG]

Yea, I kind of thought increasing the GRE gave diminishing returns (i.e., going from 650-700 pays higher dividends than going from 700-750, et cetera). Might be wrong, but I wouldn't imagine a 720 is disqualifying. Sure, we would all prefer an 800, but if you're clearing the 700-level the rest is just gravy.

Could be wrong, though.

addendum: Not to mention that several good programs (Duke, UNC) publish admissions statistics, and their average GREs for admits are ~700 v/q. Not ridiculously high. I'm sure CHYMPS are a bit higher, but 720 is surely in the range of candidates they regularly admit...

I'll say the same thing I usually say in response to this: the degree to which it matters is heavily dependent on the kind of research you want to do. As a minimally sufficient score to show you'll be able to read (not produce) the more mathy literature, schools want you to get a 700ish, but beyond that it should only matter if your GREQ will actually signal something about your ability to do the kind of research you want to do (i.e. if you want to do stats stuff or formal theory).

[wordshadow]

WARREN

Edited January 30, 2012 by awseverson

[brent09]

If I don't get an acceptance this semester i'll shoot for lower tiered next year, no worries. Thanks for the advice everyone!

I suspect you can get in to top-20 programs with 720 (x2). If it didn't work for you, I would think that (a) tightening up the app, and ( retaking the GRE, would put you in an even better position. In that situation, maybe shoot for one or two safer options, but with your record I would think that 10-20 is your realistic range. No need to shoot too far below...

[blackcoffee64]

Thanks Brent,

I'm definitely going to retake the GRE. Do you think it would be fine if I ignored the verbal and wiring sections an focus on studying only on the math portion (it really came down to I don't do well in Math on standardized tests..I have great grades in the graduate seminar stat classes I took though...)?

Also if I end up getting my fulbright grant and disseminate it, i'll probably redirect my applications to some different POI's.