How do you define "fit" ?

[1cup]

Hi,

I'm not applying to anywhere. But I have one question

How do you find out if you would "fit" into what program and what department ?

I read the result on this board and I see poeple mentioning alot about "fit" issue

Are advisors the only reliable source to seek for this info

Any recommendation how to find out if one would fit into Chicago, Madison, or Columbia ?

Many thanks

[Otherworlder]

Yeah fit can be difficult to define. Asking your professors and other PhD students is definitely a very good way to learn more about different programs and the potential fit for you. And of course you should look through every program's faculty list, find a few that have matching research interests with you, and then look at their recent publications. This will give you an idea of what their work is like, and you can then judge whether you would actually like working with them. I know one way that I really depended on to feel out the fit was how attractive I find the faculty.

[PickMe!]

Alignment with faculty interests is crucial. Another thing that I think is very important when looking at fit is just the department environment. Is it collaborative? Is it back-biting? Is it stressful and full of drama? Is it laid-back and easygoing? Do faculty wear ties or flip-flops to class? These are important considerations for me when deciding if I can commit to a program for 5+ years because I want to be comfortable and feel like I can be myself. Looking at the reputation of the department can also be helpful. I've asked a number of faculty what the discipline's opinion is of different schools and departments and they've all been very honest.

I know that Chicago (obviously) has a very strong bent toward thought and theoretical frameworks; it's known as the intellectual, cerebral, "big idea" place. Columbia has a bit of a reputation of being full of drama. From my understanding there's a lot of internal, departmental politics that students have to navigate. They are also pretty have on quant training and formal methods; I expect this will only increase with Don Green's addition to the faculty. No idea on Madison, though.

[Max Power]

Where fit is concerned, I'd like to quote the great Potter Stewart's concurrence from Jacobellis v. Ohio where he said "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it."

Fit is about trying to figure out how well suited different departments are for an applicant given what type of researcher they think they want to be. Departments tend to admit applicants who play to the strengths of their faculty. They are not trying to build well rounded slate of graduate students. They are selecting future TAs and RAs for their faculty. What good does it do them to admit someone who wants to work on research questions that are not related to the work their faculty is doing? When I was deciding where to apply, I spent a lot of time perusing CVs, looking especially at the recent publications and working papers and then reading the papers.

Here's one example from my own experience. I am interested in experiments, especially field experiments. There are plenty of people doing experiments at both Columbia and Michigan. I have a much better fit at Columbia where field experiments tend to dominate than I do at Michigan, where the experiments skew heavily towards lab and survey experiments. Consequently, I got an offer from Columbia and a rejection Michigan.

Edited February 26, 2012 by jsclar

[catchermiscount]

I totally almost posted the "I know it when I see it" thing as well. Excellent taste, young man.

[puddle]

A few months ago, I purchased a dress online. It looked great in the catalogue and reviews were overwhelmingly positive. When the dress showed up at my door, I was pleased as punch to find that the fabric felt soft and expensive and that the colour was exactly as it appeared online. I tried the dress on and returned it to the store the next day.

The moral of this story: you can't be sure of fit until you try it on for size.

Note: The big difference between applications and buying something online is that after you submit a few applications and send them your hard-earned cash, a group of people sit around and decide whether they want to send you a package. If the cuteness-elves that work at Anthropologie spent weeks assessing whether I "fit" a certain dress, I would probably sue them.

Okay, okay, I know that this was a silly analogy and that I have taken it too far but there is a point to all this crazy. I applied to a bunch of schools that seemed great fits (following the instructions posted above about reading work done by profs in the department) and was rejected. A few schools decided to admit me. When all is said and done, fit did not appear to be the deciding factor in these decisions. And no, I have NO idea what determined my success at some schools and dismal failure at others.

[kaykaykay]

A better analogy would be probably courtship. You try to appear your best the department selects you then the departments try to appear the best so you would select them. Both sides have to be satisfied to enter this engagement. .

@ meep - a number of factors are calculated into admission decesions. Sometimes you do not get what you want but what you need.

[saltlakecity2012]

A few months ago, I purchased a dress online. It looked great in the catalogue and reviews were overwhelmingly positive. When the dress showed up at my door, I was pleased as punch to find that the fabric felt soft and expensive and that the colour was exactly as it appeared online. I tried the dress on and returned it to the store the next day.

The moral of this story: you can't be sure of fit until you try it on for size.

Note: The big difference between applications and buying something online is that after you submit a few applications and send them your hard-earned cash, a group of people sit around and decide whether they want to send you a package. If the cuteness-elves that work at Anthropologie spent weeks assessing whether I "fit" a certain dress, I would probably sue them.

Okay, okay, I know that this was a silly analogy and that I have taken it too far but there is a point to all this crazy. I applied to a bunch of schools that seemed great fits (following the instructions posted above about reading work done by profs in the department) and was rejected. A few schools decided to admit me. When all is said and done, fit did not appear to be the deciding factor in these decisions. And no, I have NO idea what determined my success at some schools and dismal failure at others.

Hooray for other women on this forum!

About fit - fit is a highly multidimensional characteristic. One can measure it along methodological approach, subfield strength, regional strength, intellectual culture, normative or positive inquiries, specific professors, even things like rankings. During the beginning of my application cycle I kept reading about how yes, fit is very important, but in the top departments (think CHYMPS and a few more), you can basically study anything you want, so fit is perhaps less important than promise. Promise is obviously somewhat arbitrary, but it is supposed to be indicated by LORs, SOP, writing sample, GPA, GRE scores, honors and awards, internships, and jobs. And perhaps some other things, as well. I would say that fit is probably very important in schools narrowing down their pool of top candidates. Let's say you have 500 applicants, and 25 slots. When you narrow the pool down to 50 candidates or so, ultimate decisions will probably have more to do with whether the department wants people who are studying what you want to study.

So I would say that yes - don't apply to a school with only war and strategy scholars in the IR subfield if you want to do human rights or feminist theory research - it might not work out for you. But I was accepted to a couple of schools where I did not think fit was my greatest strength, and after discussing my application with professors from those programs, I believe it came down to the "promise" indicated by my application.

I would also like to point out that admissions committees are well aware that people change their research questions all the time, and so banking on fit to get you in is a bad idea. Probably the only exceptions to this are if you have a long and successful track record of pursuing and publishing research in a specific area of inquiry. So work on the parts of your application that you can control - fit is about the the department's perception of your application, not your perception of the department's strengths and weaknesses. Obviously you need to demonstrate that you have thought carefully about why you want to go to University X (best indicated by listing a few professors at the end of your statement and providing a little bit of argument to back up why their work is relevant to what you want to do - just saying "High-profile Professor Y is awesome, and she's published a lot, so I would like to work with her because her work is very interesting" is not as good as saying "Professor Y's article, "Why my research is super awesome and interesting and you should read it", addresses issues a, b, and c that are highly germane to my own research interests."). But top departments will take you if a) they think you're good enough (whatever that means) and if you seem like you'd do well there.

Just my thoughts.

Edit: about indicating commitment to a research question - I moved to a country in my region of interest when I was 19, worked there for a year, wrote my undergraduate thesis about my experience, went back to do field research, studied the language of the region, took a job that would immerse me in the region after graduation, and also pursued both courses, work, and research opportunities in my substantive area of interest within that region. So I think that when I said "I want to study issue x in area y", I may have had more credibility than if I had said that I wanted to study the Arab spring because it was interesting, but had no background in contentious politics, revolutions, or the Middle East.

Edited February 27, 2012 by saltlakecity2012

[shavasana]

I would say that sometimes, "fit" from the department's point of view comes down to luck. I've been incredibly lucky to be accepted to a few programs that are absolutely wonderful, one of which was such a shock I still am having trouble believing it.

But after speaking with one of my POIs at that school and talking to them about their new projects and such, I saw that I was the ideal person to help with this project and that the relatively new line of inquiry they were following was something that lined up almost perfectly with my SOP (a happy accident if you will).

But where will I think I fit? I'll let you know once I visit!

[Jwnich1]

I'd also just like to chime in to say that departments "know" when you're stretching. I had positive results with schools who I made a compelling case for in my SOP. Those schools where I wasn't quite as good a fit but I tried to make the case anyway - they didn't buy it.

I kinda see them like ... parents....they know when you're just trying to be clever...

Edited February 27, 2012 by Jwnich1