Welcome to the 2012-2013 cycle

[Master of Puppets]

I have a question for the faculty members: I am an international student from a country that does not have a tradition in political science whatsoever, and whose methods of research are quite unsophisticated (few do statistical work, and almost zero people deal with game theory, formal theory, social choice, etc). I graduated last year, and decided to go straight to a PhD program in the US. I am quite sure I will strike out this cycle, unless a miracle happens. What advice would the faculty members give to people like me? How should internationals overcome the lack of information that adcoms have?

Is there any tip especifically to us?

(If you want my stats, feel free to PM me)

[BFB]

Well, sure, but it does beg the question of whether the couple should have been together in the first place. The problem my post was hoping to help solve was the high attrition rate, so I was taking as a given that we see this as a problem. Whether age or experience is a decent predictor or not, and accepting without reservation that attrition decisions have a lot going into them, I'd be a little surprised if some careful study of who quits and why wouldn't help departments design an application process to better evaluate that risk.

 

Possibly. But how certain would I have to be to say to someone, "Yeah, you say you want to go to grad school, but I don't think your heart is really in it"? It'd be roughly like telling that couple not to get married in the first place.

 

 

 

1) My suggestion would be to increase the grad student salary budget and keep roughly the same number of students. I might be wrong about this, but I believe there is a general impression that grad students add more value than their compensation seems to credit. Budgets are tight and that is a real problem, but we are really cheap labor and it's not totally insane to suggest higher wages from a labor relations standpoint.

 

... hm. Nominally, we all add more value than what's reflected in our compensation. Otherwise, the University would never make a profit. I assume going in that that's inherent in any business that doesn't want to fail.

 

Grad students may add more than most, but to make that calculation you'd need to factor in the fact that most have tuition covered, some never end up teaching or working as an RA at all (through fellowships and attrition, for example), etc., etc. I honestly don't know what the value calculation is in purely monetary terms. And I don't know how much it would be in your interest to cut into your own value: the cost of boosting the stipends of 15 incoming students might be that we have to de-fund one or two sixth-year students (it all comes from the same budget). Whether that's a good idea probably depends on whether you're the incoming student or the sixth-year.

 

 

2) I have yet to speak to a PhD candidate or faculty member whose passion hasn't waxed and waned over time. The investment in a PhD is clearly one of passion; lots of us could make more money doing something else AND not lose the 5-7 years of income opportunity.* If your passion is weak at the same time as your finances and a job comes knocking ... A program policy of slightly higher salaries coupled with counseling on proper financial management (as well as health and relationship management) means that students feel better about their incomes, family lives and health a greater percentage of the time, some people who become discouraged would stick it out.

 

*As an example, pretend that you were set to graduate at 31, retire at 71 and could have saved $10,000 for retirement per year on average over a six year PhD if you worked instead. At 7% interest, you're sacrificing a million bucks. These types of things will occur to you when you're sick of ramen and Stata.

 

I actually don't know what resources are available for financial, health, and relationship counseling, and I should. I'll look into it and pass the info along to our grads. Thanks for the thought.

 

And around here, it's as likely to be ramen and R, I'm afraid.

[GopherGrad]

What advice would the faculty members give to people like me? How should internationals overcome the lack of information that adcoms have?

 

 

I'm not faculty, but you seem like an ideal candidate for a Master's degree.

 

There are several universities that offer terminal, academicly oriented MA degrees and offer decent funding to some students. You've probably already read about the Chicago MA programs. I would recommend at least considering smaller, cheaper programs. I have heard good things about Wake Forest. I am presently finishing an academic MA at Marquette and have been impressed in general with the mentorship and training here. If you want more information about that program or to discuss why I chose to seek an MA and why I see this as a good fit for you, send me a PM.

[BFB]

I second these questions. I know that the last question was answered somewhat (it was mentioned that fit and funding are factors for waitlists), but I have no idea as to how they work. I am sure that it varies greatly from department to department. However, if you can provide a general picture, it would be appreciated.

 

I wish I knew, sorry. I'm not ignoring this; we just don't have waitlists.

 

I have a question for the faculty members: I am an international student from a country that does not have a tradition in political science whatsoever, and whose methods of research are quite unsophisticated (few do statistical work, and almost zero people deal with game theory, formal theory, social choice, etc). I graduated last year, and decided to go straight to a PhD program in the US. I am quite sure I will strike out this cycle, unless a miracle happens. What advice would the faculty members give to people like me? How should internationals overcome the lack of information that adcoms have?

Is there any tip especifically to us?

(If you want my stats, feel free to PM me)

 

It seems as though, from what you're saying, that adcoms have good information on you, but that, because of your country's research traditions, that information is disadvantageous.

 

If you're convinced that lack of training is the problem (I'm not; I don't expect methods training in undergrads, though it's great when I find it), I'd think about trying to get funding for intensive courses, like the ones that ICPSR offers in the summer. Those would help with the skills that you'd mention, and they'd constitute a costly signal.

 

Edit: +1 to GopherGrad's response, again subject to the caveat in the previous paragraph.

Edited March 6, 2013 by BFB

[mariner84]

Long time listener, first time caller here.  I was recently admitted to what, in effect, is my "dream school," and I think I might have something to offer with regards to the recent conversation here.  This is solely based on my personal experience, so take it for what it's worth. 

 

I did my undergraduate at a school known much less for its academic achievements than its athletics, whose political science faculty frankly had very little to offer for a student seriously interested in following an academic path.  [This is not meant as a discredit to them, it's just a matter of fact that most are A.) Simply more focused on and thus able to prepare students for non-academic careers and/or B.)  Effectively disconnected from the workings of contemporary political science, not simply in a 'research' sense but even or especially in the social sense of what the job market is like, and such.  And, from what I understand, this is likely to be the case at places that aren't R1s or elite LACs.]  Accordingly, unbeknownst to me at the time, I ended up graduating with a degree in political science, but with very little idea of what "political science" actually is, let alone what is to expect from pursuing a path in the field.

 

At the same time, I did know that I didn't want to go back to school or 'get a real job' immediately after graduation, but instead spend some time traveling and living abroad.  As it turned out, I believe this is what has made all the difference.  For not only did it allow me - A.) To master one foreign language as well as dabble in a couple of others B.) Explore career options other than academia (in my case, teaching English) C.) To gain additional perspective from being immersed in other cultures and societies -  It also allowed me the time and space to get a much better idea of what political science actually is, by reading lots and lots of books, journal articles, blogs, etc., and figure out that this is actually what I want to do.

 

Thus, when I came to write my SOP, (which FWIW I think is ultimately the single biggest thing you have control over that you can use to set yourself apart from the hundreds of other candidates), I could use all of this to my advantage.  I shudder to think about what my chances would have been had I gone through this whole process during or even immediately after my undergraduate!  Ironically, when it actually came time to submit my final SOP drafts, I actually ended up taking out almost all reference to my experiences abroad, BUT,  without this time and experience I would not have been able to coherently construct a set of research interests, let alone identify people I could see myself working with.  That said, (and this too is critical) I kept in good touch with the faculty I knew could write my LORs, and let them speak to what I was doing down here.

 

One last thing: I'm not by any means saying that you need to do exactly what I did, by going abroad or even finding a think tank job or what-have-you.  What I do think is important is gaining some kind of additional perspective outside the classroom.  Even if you just take some time to bus tables and use your library card, that can end up making a huge difference in whatever you do end up deciding to do.  

[chaetzli]

To piggyback onto that ...

 

The discussion of finances can't be so easily simplified down to viewing the PhD as a commitment, nor as a labor of passion.  The PhD is a commitment in the same way that investing 5+ years into a career-path position is a commitment.  As Gopher says - people's passions wax and wane with time and experience.

 

How one views the prospect of limited finances will likely be related in some way to one's age, level of work experience, and  prospects for a top-paying position after the degree.  It will also have to do with one's expected outside financial support.  It's easy to be enthusiastic about an additional 5+ years of 'student life' when one is directly out of undergrad, and can count on outside funding from the family.  That calculus becomes a bit more complicated when one already has commitments, or perhaps can't truly count on outside help.

 

From where I'm sitting, the issue of passion for research really doesn't come into play at all; presumably, we're all passionate about research ... that's why we are pursuing research degrees.

 

Don't get me wrong. I fully understand why people are worried about limited finances and I often think about that issue myself. It is a crucial factor and having limited financial resources is always an extra burden, especially if one has to support a family. I am also aware that people's passions for research wax and wane over time. But at this point of my career I have to ask myself what I want to do with my life and I cannot imagine something else that makes me happier than research. I thus don't mind earning less for a while.

 

There are many things that I value more than money on my bank account. The academic environment is so inspiring and I love that I can decide myself what my work is about. It's great that I don't have to get up early every morning to be in my office at 8am. I also love to travel and thanks to conferences/talks there will be plenty of opportunity to do so.

 

It's interesting that you mention age. I am also in my late 20s. I don't have any financial support. I even plan on getting married soon. I've also been working after my Bachelors in a regular office job, so I know what else I could do with my time and energy. But after 6 years of being a student with no money, I'm pretty sure that being a PhD is exactly what I want.

[GopherGrad]

Possibly. But how certain would I have to be to say to someone, "Yeah, you say you want to go to grad school, but I don't think your heart is really in it"? It'd be roughly like telling that couple not to get married in the first place.

 

I understand how a faculty member might not feel it their place to question a student's stated dedication to persuing a PhD. I can only emphasize that these suggestions arose in response to Professor Nooruddin's question about how to better tackle the problem of attrition rates.

 

 

... hm. Nominally, we all add more value than what's reflected in our compensation. Otherwise, the University would never make a profit. I assume going in that that's inherent in any business that doesn't want to fail.

 

Grad students may add more than most, but to make that calculation you'd need to factor in the fact that most have tuition covered, some never end up teaching or working as an RA at all (through fellowships and attrition, for example), etc., etc. I honestly don't know what the value calculation is in purely monetary terms. And I don't know how much it would be in your interest to cut into your own value: the cost of boosting the stipends of 15 incoming students might be that we have to de-fund one or two sixth-year students (it all comes from the same budget). Whether that's a good idea probably depends on whether you're the incoming student or the sixth-year.

 

I don't think it's easy to calculate the value added of a human resource in purely monetary terms in any business. But if low pay is partly responsible for a loss of a class of human resources, and some space exists in the suspected production value added by that class, the firm should at least consider whether total productivity would rise by increasing wages and reducing turnover.

 

Some business literature emphasizes the outsized role that small absolute wage increases have on job satisfaction among people with lower incomes. This suggests to me that graduate students, as human capital with high but intangible value that produce high costs with turnover, would be ideal candidates for small absolute wage increases to reduce attrition.

[GopherGrad]

There are many things that I value more than money on my bank account.

 

Perfect. If they offer us pay raises, I'll take yours.

[cooperstreet]

One more question for faculty:

 

I worked part time while doing my MA, full time while researching my MA thesis, and full time while taking math and language classes after graduating and looking to build up my skills.

 

Is this relevant information to include in an SOP?

[chaetzli]

Perfect. If they offer us pay raises, I'll take yours.

[zzzzzz]

anyone still waiting on NYU? ready to be done.

[PoliSwede]

There's a lot of good information in this thread, especially in the last few pages. Too bad that the thread's massive! I did see that BFB gathered some links over in the other thread to his and other faculty responses.

 

I hope future PhD students come by here to check most/all of it out when they put together their application.

[Doorkeeper]

For anyone still waiting on Harvard and ready for closure, you should feel free to email the Graduate Program Administrator in Gov for a prompt response.

[USCoregonian]

Anyone know anything about the status for the Jackson School PhD at UW? I applied there sort of on a whim and I'm almost certainly not going there, but it would be nice to here back.

[BFB]

I understand how a faculty member might not feel it their place to question a student's stated dedication to persuing a PhD. I can only emphasize that these suggestions arose in response to Professor Nooruddin's question about how to better tackle the problem of attrition rates.

 

Some business literature emphasizes the outsized role that small absolute wage increases have on job satisfaction among people with lower incomes. This suggests to me that graduate students, as human capital with high but intangible value that produce high costs with turnover, would be ideal candidates for small absolute wage increases to reduce attrition.

 

Fair point. But if, as you also argue, graduate students are a biased subset of employees who are willing to trade significant earning potential for job satisfaction (and a chance at perfect job security), what makes you think that most, or even many, cases of attrition are due to a desire for greater earning potential? Indeed, if the main calculation is earning potential vs. job satisfaction, an increase in salary, if it did anything, would retain the least satisfied students, who might not have the best long-term prospects in academia.

 

To be clear, I'm responding to the argument (and to a degree playing Devil's advocate), not reacting against the idea that graduate students should be better paid. I think that should happen on purely humanitarian grounds.

 

It's interesting that you mention age. I am also in my late 20s. I don't have any financial support. I even plan on getting married soon. I've also been working after my Bachelors in a regular office job, so I know what else I could do with my time and energy. But after 6 years of being a student with no money, I'm pretty sure that being a PhD is exactly what I want.

 

Congratulations—both on your impending wedding and on having found your passion. 

 

One more question for faculty:

 

I worked part time while doing my MA, full time while researching my MA thesis, and full time while taking math and language classes after graduating and looking to build up my skills.

 

Is this relevant information to include in an SOP?

 

To a degree. It speaks to your tenacity and ability to do hard work, which clearly matters. But I can't emphasize enough that you're sending your application to a bunch of geeks. You can't do much better than to tell us what turns your crank, what keeps you up until 2am, what question or idea you just can't get out of your head.

[cooperstreet]

It's interesting that you mention age. I am also in my late 20s. I don't have any financial support. I even plan on getting married soon. I've also been working after my Bachelors in a regular office job, so I know what else I could do with my time and energy. But after 6 years of being a student with no money, I'm pretty sure that being a PhD is exactly what I want.

 

Congratulations! I'm in the same exact boat.

[GopherGrad]

Fair point. But if, as you also argue, graduate students are a biased subset of employees who are willing to trade significant earning potential for job satisfaction (and a chance at perfect job security), what makes you think that most, or even many, cases of attrition are due to a desire for greater earning potential? Indeed, if the main calculation is earning potential vs. job satisfaction, an increase in salary, if it did anything, would retain the least satisfied students, who might not have the best long-term prospects in academia.

 

1) Because I find studies that make arguments about the power of earnings to affect job satisfaction at low income levels compelling, and the way the mechanism is described, it seems to me that even people who love the substance of their jobs are affected by the despair sometimes associated with low wages.

 

2) Because I gave up a ten-year career in an extremely lucrative profession to get a master's in political science. Despite my certainty that I made the right choice for me and my continuing passion for academics and teaching (I have, after all decided to do a PhD), making ends meet has been extremely stressful and distracts both from my achievement in the field and my overall satisfaction with my life. Sometimes, frankly, it doesn't feel like a matter of wanting it. I simply wonder if I can cover my existing bills on a student's salary.

 

I think that should happen on purely humanitarian grounds.

 

*snort*

[eponine997]

Anyone know anything about the status for the Jackson School PhD at UW? I applied there sort of on a whim and I'm almost certainly not going there, but it would be nice to here back.

 

I am fairly certain (heard from another user who PM'd me) they have sent out at least one acceptance.  Given the program is in its inaugural year (for the incoming class), they are aiming for a class of around 5.  

[eponine997]

There are far too many people to quote/respond to in the "what can be done to reduce attrition?" "how can success in grad school be predicted" so I'll raise the following points.

 

1) With the prospect of predicting outcome based on personal circumstance - looking at evidence that suggests people of a certain age are more likely to drop out or succeed, or people with a certain number of years or type of work experience, or people of a certain gender or familial status runs the obvious risk of discrimination.  I don't think anyone wants to go down that road, unless they are a mid-twenties, white male, already married and living off a trust fund (because the data would probably screw the rest of us).  

 

2) What does everyone think about decreasing attrition by "managing the field?"  I would imagine that in addition to a financial incentive to quit early and take a non-academic job, there is also incentive based on the EXTREMELY dim prospects in the academic job market.  Why not limit the number of PhDs that can be awarded or the number of programs that can award?  If someone knows better, please correct me, but I'm fairly certain medical fields such as physical and occupational therapy regulate the number of programs that can grant degrees and the number of degrees each program can grant - and this corresponds with some regulatory association's knowledge of the job market (so you don't get schools turning the grad program into a cash cow, as they have with law schools, admitting more students than the job market can handle).  I'm not suggesting eliminate the competitive nature of the job market entirely (since certain schools can make better offers and certain jobs are more desirable than others).  But with something like only 50-60 percent of PS PhDs obtaining TT jobs, I think decreasing the number of candidates on the job market via limiting the number of PhD programs or PhDs that a school can grant could increase the incentive to complete the PhD.  This might not be feasible, but might be worth discussing (we might not be able to realistically "manage the field" but I am willing to bet better prospects in the job market would decrease attrition).  Thoughts?

[teamind]

Not to break up the discussion but.... back to admission results for a moment: It's been slow lately. What schools are people still waiting to hear from?

Personally, I'm waiting on CUNY and Rutgers.

[Master of Puppets]

Not to break up the discussion but.... back to admission results for a moment: It's been slow lately. What schools are people still waiting to hear from?

Personally, I'm waiting on CUNY and Rutgers.

I am waiting for Chicago. I sent them an e-mail, but I haven't received an answer so far. Is anyone on the same boat as I am?

Edited March 7, 2013 by Master of Puppets

[student90210]

Not to break up the discussion but.... back to admission results for a moment: It's been slow lately. What schools are people still waiting to hear from?

Personally, I'm waiting on CUNY and Rutgers.

 

Waiting on American University, Brandeis and Claremont. According to the results board, I should still have some hope about UMD. 

[CGMJ]

Not to break up the discussion but.... back to admission results for a moment: It's been slow lately. What schools are people still waiting to hear from?

Personally, I'm waiting on CUNY and Rutgers.

 

I'm waiting on UCLA and Harvard. I emailed Harvard but haven't gotten a response (I'm sure Thom has gotten hundreds of emails since people started posting that he emailed them their rejections, so he's probably just backed up!). 

[driver 8]

Just curious if anyone here knows much about Portland State? The application is not due until May 1st (sent mine in a few days ago). They have a great program but I cannot find their acceptance rate/competitiveness/usual timetable in terms of getting back to you anywhere. I see a lot of other majors have been accepted/declined, though.

[Guest hopefulfool]

The probability is one. In the case of every other elite program, there came a day or two in which the board clearly lit up with results and at least three or four regular posters claimed admits in this thread in short order. I would buy a hat so I could eat my hat if Harvard turns out to be any different.

GopherGrad, unless I totally misread your comment, can you please post a picture of yourself eating the hat?

Edited March 7, 2013 by hopefulfool