Welcome to the 2012-2013 cycle

[mutatismutandis]

I'm starting to question the integrity of the results search.  In previous pages, several people mentioned issues; but honestly, I can understand if someone trashes a school they didn't get into, even if its not very professional, these are emotional times for us all.  But what really does worry me in when someone double posts a rejection with the same information (a U of Chicago rejection) and in that double post puts in a YouTube link saying something along the lines of "get a sweet job here after you move on from your silly dream".  Whoever posted this, please explain yourself, maybe I took you the wrong way... but otherwise I'm slapping those with spam reports pretty soon.

Definitely some crude trolling going on in the results search.

[Mnemonics2]

are you claiming that post, or is that skepticism I sense? 

 

Haha, no no. Apologies, I'm not claiming that (thank goodness (for now)). That was incredulity...I mean, the only non-trolling thing I can think of is that someone called the department and was such a clear reject that they were told no (or that it was unlikely in the extreme).

[CGMJ]

Hello fellow nerds. 

 

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results. 

 

I've uploaded the file, which you can download here: http://wikisend.com/download/570440/Polisci%20PhD%20admit%20data.xlsx

 

For now it only has the schools I'm looking at, but if anyone wants to add others (or has real cohort stats from schools) feel free to add! Rows in green are schools that have already started appearing on GC, blue may be coming this week. 

 

Enjoy!

[PhDhopeful2013]

Haha, no no. Apologies, I'm not claiming that (thank goodness (for now)). That was incredulity...I mean, the only non-trolling thing I can think of is that someone called the department and was such a clear reject that they were told no (or that it was unlikely in the extreme).

 

haha OK that's what I thought!

[CGMJ]

Hello fellow nerds. 

 

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results. 

 

I've uploaded the file, which you can download here: http://wikisend.com/download/570440/Polisci%20PhD%20admit%20data.xlsx

 

For now it only has the schools I'm looking at, but if anyone wants to add others (or has real cohort stats from schools) feel free to add! Rows in green are schools that have already started appearing on GC, blue may be coming this week. 

 

Enjoy!

 

p.s., this obviously has the huge caveat that it's all my imperfect manual counts and estimates, yadayadayada.

[PoliSwede]

Rejection by phone? If that is real, it's also extremely cruel!

[Wemayet]

Hello fellow nerds. 

 

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results. 

 

Drought + Fuel + Fire

 

Thanks for sharing!

[zzzzzz]

Hello fellow nerds. 

 

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results. 

 

I've uploaded the file, which you can download here: http://wikisend.com/download/570440/Polisci PhD admit data.xlsx

 

For now it only has the schools I'm looking at, but if anyone wants to add others (or has real cohort stats from schools) feel free to add! Rows in green are schools that have already started appearing on GC, blue may be coming this week. 

 

Enjoy!

Hah, fellow nerds indeed. Thanks for this! The Columbia acceptance rate is really surprising to me, for some reason. So low!

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

And those numbers on that file is exactly why I didnt bother applying to any of them...any school that has more than 100 applicants for 10-20 spots is a shot in the dark statistically speaking and I know I wouldnt get picked...

[Master of Puppets]

Hello fellow nerds. 

 

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results. 

 

I've uploaded the file, which you can download here: http://wikisend.com/download/570440/Polisci%20PhD%20admit%20data.xlsx

 

For now it only has the schools I'm looking at, but if anyone wants to add others (or has real cohort stats from schools) feel free to add! Rows in green are schools that have already started appearing on GC, blue may be coming this week. 

 

Enjoy!

Dude, you should get into your dream school just by doing that.

Thx a lot!

[Wemayet]

Hah, fellow nerds indeed. Thanks for this! The Columbia acceptance rate is really surprising to me, for some reason. So low!

 

I believe it was noted in the spreadsheet that the Columbia data included MA data - probably throws things off a bit.

[CGMJ]

I believe it was noted in the spreadsheet that the Columbia data included MA data - probably throws things off a bit.

 

Yes, my guess is this is why. The Harvard data is also shaky, I only know that last year's GC reported a rejection letter that said 500 applicants for 27 "spots", which I assumed to be enrolled but could have been accepted.

[CGMJ]

Dude, you should get into your dream school just by doing that.

Thx a lot!

 

LOL, thanks! If any adcom people are following...message me for my real name 

[zzzzzz]

I believe it was noted in the spreadsheet that the Columbia data included MA data - probably throws things off a bit.

Oh duh. Thanks.

[Master of Puppets]

Looking at the spreadsheet, though, I think we need to realize that despite the huge number of some schools, the actual number of people actually disputing the slots is smaller than the raw numbers. 
For instance, in some schools, if you don't have a combined score of 1400 in the GRE (321, in the new exam) you won't probably be considered . Also, some people submit their applications, but their recommenders do not upload their letters. The list could go on forever.
If you trust your application, you should not worry about the large number of applicants.

[ahandphd]

Hello fellow nerds.

Because I kept neurotically going back and checking last year's results pages etc., I decided to make a spreadsheet of this info. I then went overboard (needed a distraction?) and also added schools' reported admissions statistics, and then went a step further into crazytown and imputed some of the missing stats based on GC-reported results.

I've uploaded the file, which you can download here: http://wikisend.com/download/570440/Polisci%20PhD%20admit%20data.xlsx

For now it only has the schools I'm looking at, but if anyone wants to add others (or has real cohort stats from schools) feel free to add! Rows in green are schools that have already started appearing on GC, blue may be coming this week.

Enjoy!

You should contact your schools to add this to your application package. Thanks for the info

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Looking at the spreadsheet, though, I think we need to realize that despite the huge number of some schools, the actual number of people actually disputing the slots is smaller than the raw numbers. 

For instance, in some schools, if you don't have a combined score of 1400 in the GRE (321, in the new exam) you won't probably be considered . Also, some people submit their applications, but their recommenders do not upload their letters. The list could go on forever.

If you trust your application, you should not worry about the large number of applicants.

 

The conversion from 1400 to 321 isn't entirely valid, because the new test measures intervals of improvement more effectively (e.g. the last few scores on the GRE aren't all within the same percentile). I'm just pointing this out in case anyone saw this and panicked.

[CGMJ]

Looking at the spreadsheet, though, I think we need to realize that despite the huge number of some schools, the actual number of people actually disputing the slots is smaller than the raw numbers. 

For instance, in some schools, if you don't have a combined score of 1400 in the GRE (321, in the new exam) you won't probably be considered . Also, some people submit their applications, but their recommenders do not upload their letters. The list could go on forever.

If you trust your application, you should not worry about the large number of applicants.

 

This is very true. Congrats to UCLA people...this is freaking me out though!

[Master of Puppets]

The conversion from 1400 to 321 isn't entirely valid, because the new test measures intervals of improvement more effectively (e.g. the last few scores on the GRE aren't all within the same percentile). I'm just pointing this out in case anyone saw this and panicked.

Thanks man, I've been through the same GRE paranoia. Sorry if everyone panicked.

[Quigley]

This is very true. Congrats to UCLA people...this is freaking me out though!

 

Me too. I had convinced myself they were done accepting on Monday and had already gone through the disappointment stage.  So now I have to do the whole thing over again. 

 

Congrats to them and everyone else with good news today!

[rkmattson]

Me too. I had convinced myself they were done accepting on Monday and had already gone through the disappointment stage. So now I have to do the whole thing over again.

Congrats to them and everyone else with good news today!

Agreed on all fronts! Glad that there's still hope but freaked out that there is in some ways too! Congrats to those who've heard so far!

[polisciftw]

For heaven's sake, UCSD. I know the perfect weather and surfer culture slows everything down, but c'mon.

[zzzzzz]

For heaven's sake, UCSD. I know the perfect weather and surfer culture slows everything down, but c'mon.

Yeah they seem to be having no trouble in other departments.

[rkmattson]

Slow day so far....

[CGMJ]

For heaven's sake, UCSD. I know the perfect weather and surfer culture slows everything down, but c'mon.

 

For serious. I'm just trying to keep reminding myself that it's still early morning in California (it's crazy that the two UCLA phone call admits earlier were before 9am pacific time!).