Contacting POIs

[kbirch]

For people who are getting into schools right now, what was your communication like with your POIs? I emailed mine brief messages but our communication didn't get into too much detail... It seems like a lot of people on here know theirs really well. Is that true for you? And how do you get that kinda conversation started?

I ask for my "Plan C" - applying next year for the THIRD time. *sigh*

[SocHope]

I didn't contact anyone at the schools to which I applied. In fact, one of the programs I applied to, Berkeley, states on the department website:

"It is not necessary or encouraged to contact the faculty with whom you are interested in working with, nor is it necessary to know who would be a perfect match for you and your research interests. A suitable advisor will be assigned to you as your goals and interests become evident throughout the program."

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

How to contact them?

Dear ______,

I am applying to graduate school (season) and was looking into (____ university) and came across your faculty page. I have looked into your research interests and have read (_____ if you have read a publication of theirs) and feel that we would have a good research fit.

My research interests are _______, ______, ______, and ______. (go into some detail here, don't just say political soc, religion, social movements, etc.)

I was wondering if 1) you were accepting students to work with ____ (the season e.g. fall 2012) and 2) if you feel that my research interests align well with yours.

Thanks a lot,

_______

I used that format and got replies 9/10 times. Some people gave really apathetic responses but with others it created really good dialogue afterwards.

Edited February 7, 2012 by ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

Oh, and if you have the money, go to the ASA this summer. You have plenty of time to create some POI's and then attend where they present and have a short conversation afterwards. You would be surprised how much this could help.

[kbirch]

@Slumgullion, that's really similar to the email I sent out, too. I heard back from a few people, but didn't get much of a conversation going. Did you get more extensive than that?

Also, the ASA is a great idea. I went to the PSA when I was an undergrad but didn't think to meet people. Maybe that'll be my next step... Thanks!

[quantitative]

For people who are getting into schools right now, what was your communication like with your POIs? I emailed mine brief messages but our communication didn't get into too much detail... It seems like a lot of people on here know theirs really well. Is that true for you? And how do you get that kinda conversation started?

I ask for my "Plan C" - applying next year for the THIRD time. *sigh*

I contacted one person of interest, closest to my ideal research, at each of the schools with a letter similar to ThisSlum's response. I would also include a brief description of my own research. In addition, I also would read one or two of their publications (after looking over their bio/cv) and suggest future research based on their papers that I'd love to pursue with them. I expended a lot of effort on this, but I got responses to all of my emails.

I didn't ask out right "are you accepting students?" or "do you think this is a good fit". I'd just leave it at that I'm applying for their grad program and I'd love to discuss the implications of their research. As they had a brief description of my research right there in the email, I could tell off the responses whether they thought my interests alligned with their own interests. The ones not accepting students were pretty forthright about that, although that didn't stop them from replying to me. This might be helpful in the future as I already have gotten to know a few people doing interesting research in my subfield. One day, if I run into them at a conference, I'll already know about their research (well as of 2011/2012).

Edited February 7, 2012 by quantitative

[hobokennojokin]

My take on this is that contacting POI's is a double edged sword. If you strike a chord with a certain professor, certainly that works in your favor. But I also get the feeling that these types of exchanges run the risk of "putting yourself in a box." I think it's a danger for junior scholars to be too specific with their research interests because research interests change all the time, especially for those of us who have yet to gain exposure at the graduate level (this may be a bit different for applicants w/ their MA). Just my two cents.

[sleepycat]

I sent an email similar to the one posted above to my NYU POI. I didn't get a response though. :/ Santa Cruz was very forward in saying it is not the best idea to do so.

[panasic]

I contacted a POI at Berkeley, because they posted the suggestion NOT to do that after I did it. I felt a bit sheepish, but my main goal was to learn more about the program and working with the professor from a student. I asked the POI to suggest some current students I could speak with. I ended up speaking to a student and thought it was an extremely valuable experience. I knew a lot more about the program.

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

I contacted a POI at Berkeley, because they posted the suggestion NOT to do that after I did it. I felt a bit sheepish, but my main goal was to learn more about the program and working with the professor from a student. I asked the POI to suggest some current students I could speak with. I ended up speaking to a student and thought it was an extremely valuable experience. I knew a lot more about the program.

This seems like a good strategy to get a response too (asking for suggestions on graduate students that might have similar interests)

[jenjenjen]

i actually had no idea how common it was to contact POIs until i read this forum. My profs in undergrad never recommended it, buuut i also went to a school that didn't even have graduate students in sociology. So I didn't contact any and have been accepted to 3 solid schools so it's def not a necessity. Though maybe it helps if you have a less strong "on paper" application but want to emphasize your dedication and interest?

[kbirch]

Thanks, jenjenjen! That makes me hopeful for some success... I haven't heard anything yet, but most of my schools don't seem to be done letting people know / haven't started letting people know yet.

*Fingers crossed!*

[sciencegirl]

I would second @jenjenjen.... Stanford's site is also very specific about not contacting anyone, and I got in despite not having any contact with anyone there.

I think the important question to ask/answer here though is not whether or not you got a reply back or an inquisitive response, but maybe OP is wondering if contacting a POI actually led directly to an acceptance (in someone's opinion). I've seen a few postings on the board here where a POI has e-mailed a rejection or WL back... or people have had what they think to be a great POI contact, only to lead to a rejection. Thoughts?

@thisslum always makes me laugh! his/her posting of the madlibs POI e-mail template looks totally hilarious in they way its posted.

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

@Slumgullion, that's really similar to the email I sent out, too. I heard back from a few people, but didn't get much of a conversation going. Did you get more extensive than that?

Also, the ASA is a great idea. I went to the PSA when I was an undergrad but didn't think to meet people. Maybe that'll be my next step... Thanks!

Ya one conversation I had with a particular POI ended up with multiple e-mails back and forth. He also sent me articles he has published and chapters out of one of his books that were right up my ally. He also forwarded our conversation to the graduate chair and then I had a few emails with him.

Another POI I have I met at ASA and is a friend of the professor I published with. I've exchanged a few emails with him. And the third person that I had multiple e-mails with is a top 10 university and she was engaged in the convo but it wasn't like the other two. She basically told me my research was interesting, we'd be a good fit, asked where all I was applying stuff like that and said that when the time came that a POI's suggestion to the adcomm could be helpful at times.

I strongly suggest going to the ASA. It takes a lot of effort to meet people. I went without knowing a single person and started up some convos with professors and went to some receptions. In fact, I went to a ton of receptions. I'm convinced 70% of the ASA is just professors just drinking with old buddies and playing catch up. 20% is schmoozing and 10% is actually presenting research. I met some current graduate students and have kept in touch with one in particular who had similar interests to mine as well.

I wish I had the money to go to the one this summer.

[tt503]

I strongly suggest going to the ASA. It takes a lot of effort to meet people. I went without knowing a single person and started up some convos with professors and went to some receptions. In fact, I went to a ton of receptions. I'm convinced 70% of the ASA is just professors just drinking with old buddies and playing catch up. 20% is schmoozing and 10% is actually presenting research. I met some current graduate students and have kept in touch with one in particular who had similar interests to mine as well.

This is pretty much the exact percentage breakdown of when I attend AAR/SBL/ASOR. It can be quite fun when you have friends in different departments scattered across the country.

[rising_star]

But I also get the feeling that these types of exchanges run the risk of "putting yourself in a box." I think it's a danger for junior scholars to be too specific with their research interests because research interests change all the time, especially for those of us who have yet to gain exposure at the graduate level (this may be a bit different for applicants w/ their MA). Just my two cents.

Why? POIs know that one's research interests change but that doesn't mean they don't want to know that you are capable of developing sound research ideas. I applied to PhD programs to work in the general subfield that I'm still in but with a different regional and topical focus than I currently have. When I go to conferences and see the very people I applied to work with, none of them are surprised at all about how different my research is now from what I originally set out to do. When I applied to MA programs, I knew nothing about my field at all but, even so, the professors I contacted were interested in what my ideas were and how I might develop a project based on them. That's important to them because otherwise, they have to try to teach you that in addition to all the other things they have to teach you in grad school.

I strongly suggest going to the ASA. It takes a lot of effort to meet people. I went without knowing a single person and started up some convos with professors and went to some receptions. In fact, I went to a ton of receptions. I'm convinced 70% of the ASA is just professors just drinking with old buddies and playing catch up. 20% is schmoozing and 10% is actually presenting research. I met some current graduate students and have kept in touch with one in particular who had similar interests to mine as well.

This is a double-edged sword, imo. Going to ASA (or any other major national disciplinary conference) is expensive plus, it can be difficult to get facetime with people because they're often really busy. When I want to see particular people at the national conference, I email them in advance to get a sense of their availability and try to arrange something. In terms of making it happen, cell phones end up playing a major role in making sure we're on the same page about where and when we're going to meet. I personally have had little success in just going up to people right after they talk but that could be a personality thing.

And yes, my conference experience suggests that drinking/partying is a big part of it. Think about it this way. When you're a faculty member, you have all your grad school friends plus all the other faculty you've met (while on the market, because you were on a panel together, of the department you used to be in, etc) that you want to see. The easiest and least expensive way to see all of them is by going to the conference. So, yea, it's about getting together with people you already know as much, if not more so, than it is about meeting new people.

[hobokennojokin]

@rising_star: I think you're completely right about displaying the capacity form sound research questions. I was thinking specifically of being careful not to get so so very specific, especially if the particular niche you want to study fits well with a few, or even just one faculty member in the department. Who knows if that professor's research interests have moved on? Either way, the way I would play it would be just like you said, to mention a general subfield and then list possible research interests you may be interested in pursuing.

[lexicana]

This is my second year applying. The first year I did not contact any POI's because I was afraid, as some have mentioned, of the double edge-sword. What if I say something silly? What if I can't explain my research interests? What if they hate me? You get the point. I didn't get in. This year I contacted one POI from each institution. I received 4 ouf of 5 responses. The converstations mostly involved a couple of short emails and a 30 minute or so meeting. I felt that they all went well. One of the best things about the meetings was the extra tips they provided. One faculty member encouraged me to highlight certain parts of my experience/interests and downplay others. One POI offered to read my PS. So far I have been accepted into 1 program (the one who offered to read my PS). I don't think that it is absolutely necessary to contact your POI's but from my experience I would encourage it. Also, I don't think it has to lead to long and deep discussions as some seem to have. All my interactions were short but very hellpful.

[kbhaven]

I don't think it is necessary to contact your POI, but the following link is extremely helpful for those who are about to do it: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/advice/prospective.html

[Chuck]

Great advice here. My experience with sociology programs has been that most seem to operate on the "cohort model." That is, the committee will admit the target number of applicants based on qualifications with an eye towards an even distribution in general subfield of interest, but without much consideration for the specific advisor an applicant says they want to work with. So, unless it's clear that your interests are so narrow that there is only one faculty member who would be a suitable advisor and he/she is not available, your application is viewed in the same pool as all the rest. I have heard of some cases where a student has established a genuine connection with a faculty member (usually through previous collaboration or other substantive knowledge of the applicant beyond a simple e-mail exchange), which is likely the only real exception to the cohort model of admissions.

This is in contrast to many other fields, which admit on the "lab/advisor model." As someone whose research straddles several disciplines, I've been having a da&% frustrating time trying to suss out the admissions paradigms of each department I applied to. They can be radically different. Wisconsin's sociology department discourages faculty contact until after admission to their program. Nevertheless, I sent repeated e-mails to several faculty in their program. I never received a response. I found this a bit unprofessional, as I had genuine questions about my research fit with their program, and wasn't just trying to fluff up my name for the committee. Now I've been admitted, and my questions still remain. Here's to hoping they will be answered at the visit day in March? Or maybe if I e-mail faculty now, I'll actually receive a response? I'm not that bitter...really

At another department (in a different social science discipline), I made the effort to visit the school in mid-October. I was told that if I didn't get the attention of one particular faculty member, my application would be summarily denied. I set up meetings with several faculty (at this school, they actually did respond to my e-mails! joy!). I sit down to a meeting with "professor x" and the first thing he tells me is that he's "already identified" the two students he's admitting for the fall. This is a full two months before the application deadline!!! He hasn't even gotten to see the whole pool of applicants! Professor X goes on to tell me that most successful applicants (this is a top department in the discipline) are already "volunteering" in their prospective PhD labs. Nevermind the formal admissions process. Talk about quid pro quo! Inappropriate.

The good thing for most of you all is that sociology departments don't appear to operate this way. Though I would hazard a guess that, especially in the most competitive programs, there is always going to be a little nepotism around the edges. The #1 concern of schools is to admit "the best" candidates, and you can bet that (especially when they have to sift through 400 applications) they are going to use whatever inside tracks they can to identify "the best." I've heard some unsavory things about a particular Ivy's sociology department. Not that it is impossible that one will be admitted without connections, but that a large proportion of their cohort includes people who have augmented their formal admissions application in substantive ways. Connections, connections, connections.

I'm happy to report that I don't believe this to be the case at Wisconsin.

BTW-

I've noticed in recent days that several people on this forum have said things like "Just rejected from Program X! Oh well, I can't blame them as there is nobody there doing the kind of work I'm interested in." This is baffling to me. Why expend the time, money, and effort to apply to a program you already know isn't a good fit? This is a 5-8 year PhD we're talking about, fit is pretty much everything. Are people just rationalizing a la sour grapes?

[SocHope]

BTW-

I've noticed in recent days that several people on this forum have said things like "Just rejected from Program X! Oh well, I can't blame them as there is nobody there doing the kind of work I'm interested in." This is baffling to me. Why expend the time, money, and effort to apply to a program you already know isn't a good fit? This is a 5-8 year PhD we're talking about, fit is pretty much everything. Are people just rationalizing a la sour grapes?

I don't think I've yet come across a post where someone said there was NO one doing anything within their research interest, but I have seen quite a few "Well, there was only one person who fit my research interests" which is still quite a risk. I was careful to select schools that matched my overall research interests and that had a number of faculty working within such areas or closely related areas, even though I didn't name or contact them.

[quantitative]

I've noticed in recent days that several people on this forum have said things like "Just rejected from Program X! Oh well, I can't blame them as there is nobody there doing the kind of work I'm interested in." This is baffling to me. Why expend the time, money, and effort to apply to a program you already know isn't a good fit? This is a 5-8 year PhD we're talking about, fit is pretty much everything. Are people just rationalizing a la sour grapes?

I think some of these cases might be legitimate although some people might be just rationalizing. For someone applying to say 15 programs, I feel like some of these might just be what-if-they-admit-me applications that aren't really grounded in fit/emphasis of the program on your specialty. I think some people just love the idea of being at a prestigious school, even if fit isn't there. I have no problem with it as it's their money being wasted on schools that don't work.

I'm not really seeing this too much in Sociology although it seems pretty rampant in other programs. It might be due to the fact that the big publics (not the Ivies) seem to have a level playing field with the Ivies within Sociology programs.

Edited February 8, 2012 by quantitative

[dsmiles]

i've asked this question in a few other threads with no luck, but ill try it again here: does anyone have insight into admissions at Brown's sociology department?

[lexicana]

Great advice here. My experience with sociology programs has been that most seem to operate on the "cohort model." That is, the committee will admit the target number of applicants based on qualifications with an eye towards an even distribution in general subfield of interest, but without much consideration for the specific advisor an applicant says they want to work with. So, unless it's clear that your interests are so narrow that there is only one faculty member who would be a suitable advisor and he/she is not available, your application is viewed in the same pool as all the rest. I have heard of some cases where a student has established a genuine connection with a faculty member (usually through previous collaboration or other substantive knowledge of the applicant beyond a simple e-mail exchange), which is likely the only real exception to the cohort model of admissions.

This is in contrast to many other fields, which admit on the "lab/advisor model." As someone whose research straddles several disciplines, I've been having a da&% frustrating time trying to suss out the admissions paradigms of each department I applied to. They can be radically different. Wisconsin's sociology department discourages faculty contact until after admission to their program. Nevertheless, I sent repeated e-mails to several faculty in their program. I never received a response. I found this a bit unprofessional, as I had genuine questions about my research fit with their program, and wasn't just trying to fluff up my name for the committee. Now I've been admitted, and my questions still remain. Here's to hoping they will be answered at the visit day in March? Or maybe if I e-mail faculty now, I'll actually receive a response? I'm not that bitter...really

At another department (in a different social science discipline), I made the effort to visit the school in mid-October. I was told that if I didn't get the attention of one particular faculty member, my application would be summarily denied. I set up meetings with several faculty (at this school, they actually did respond to my e-mails! joy!). I sit down to a meeting with "professor x" and the first thing he tells me is that he's "already identified" the two students he's admitting for the fall. This is a full two months before the application deadline!!! He hasn't even gotten to see the whole pool of applicants! Professor X goes on to tell me that most successful applicants (this is a top department in the discipline) are already "volunteering" in their prospective PhD labs. Nevermind the formal admissions process. Talk about quid pro quo! Inappropriate.

The good thing for most of you all is that sociology departments don't appear to operate this way. Though I would hazard a guess that, especially in the most competitive programs, there is always going to be a little nepotism around the edges. The #1 concern of schools is to admit "the best" candidates, and you can bet that (especially when they have to sift through 400 applications) they are going to use whatever inside tracks they can to identify "the best." I've heard some unsavory things about a particular Ivy's sociology department. Not that it is impossible that one will be admitted without connections, but that a large proportion of their cohort includes people who have augmented their formal admissions application in substantive ways. Connections, connections, connections.

I'm happy to report that I don't believe this to be the case at Wisconsin.

BTW-

I've noticed in recent days that several people on this forum have said things like "Just rejected from Program X! Oh well, I can't blame them as there is nobody there doing the kind of work I'm interested in." This is baffling to me. Why expend the time, money, and effort to apply to a program you already know isn't a good fit? This is a 5-8 year PhD we're talking about, fit is pretty much everything. Are people just rationalizing a la sour grapes?

I'm not sure about others but I can tell you why I applied to a program that isn't necessarily the best research fit. Basically, I cannot relocate so I had to apply to all the programs in my area. Still, of those programs there was only one program that really didn't seem to fit. Two of them are great fits and the other is a pretty good fit. If you don't have the luxury of a nationwide search then you have to make the best of the programs available. I don't suspect I will get into the program that is not a good fit but I felt like I had to throw my hat in the ring anyways. One never knows.

[sciencegirl]

@dsmiles. sadly, I think no. We are in the dark about Brown. It doesn't seem to be many people's "top choice" though if it is yours, then you might be in luck as they might have less applicants. I also didn't notice many people applying.. it might be because we don't know much about it, hence perpetuating the loop of no one knowing much about the program. Perhaps try e-mailing their graduate students from their website.. they look like a friendly bunch!

@chuck. try e-mailing faculty now at wisconsin, I'm sure you will get a response back within an hour. This has been my case now with the program I got into, and its like a light bulb switch. Once a program lets you in, they really want you to go. If you aren't feeling that from Wisconsin right now, then I would think that is weird.

And about applying to programs that aren't the "Best fit" - here's the deal. This game is a gentle and complicated mating dance between you and these all-powerful beasts called sociology grad programs. Besides just "fit" we sadly need to be concerned about these factors that while we try not to think are a big deal (and try to pretend/ignore), seem to be things everyone at one point has a panic attack about:

1. funding

2. location

3 prestige/rank of program

4. actual availability of faculty we want to work with and how we "mesh" with them

So when people apply, I think they take into consideration all these things, along with "fit" - and truthfully, if you are studying immigration, and a sociology program doesn't have someone you can work with.. then that's a pretty limited sociology program... The program might not be Princeton, but almost every program has someone doing immigration, along with the other big sub-fields of Soc.