Faculty perspectives

[dumbunny]

Legitimate red flag, or am I overreacting?

I've been admitted to a political science PhD program, and met with some faculty members one-on-one. The program director (herself a faculty member) had suggested some people for me to meet, and her list matched the names I'd come up with based on CVs and reading past publications.

When I finally got to meet faculty members, they all told me there wasn't much overlap between my research interests and what they do. One professor ("prof A") suggested I talk with "prof B"; I go talk with prof B, and he refers me to somebody else...prof A. Later, a pair of faculty members also told me I wasn't a fit with them, and used the rest of our scheduled meeting time to catch up with each other while I couldn't get an academic word in edgewise.

Afterward, I told the program director how the in-person meetings went (she'd asked). She suggested some other people for me to reach out to, so I emailed four professors. I heard back from one person who's retiring next year, but I haven't heard a peep from the other three in the 2+ weeks since. (I've reached out to each professor twice).

Overall, I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my fit with the department. It's a smaller program, and I've met or reached out to nearly half the faculty already. It seems like faculty sees me as a great match for the department in general, just working with somebody else. Aside from that, I'm just not feeling like I'm being taken seriously - which is kind of weird, because the department's offering me a research fellowship and ~4k more funding than other members of my prospective cohort.

Edited April 4, 2017 by dumbunny

[BFB]

19 minutes ago, dumbunny said:

Legitimate red flag, or am I overreacting?

I've been admitted to a political science PhD program, and met with some faculty members one-on-one. The program director (herself a faculty member) had suggested some people for me to meet, and her list matched the names I'd come up with based on CVs and reading past publications.

When I finally got to meet faculty members, they all told me there wasn't much overlap between my research interests and what they do. One professor ("prof A") suggested I talk with "prof B"; I go talk with prof B, and he refers me to somebody else...prof A. Later, a pair of faculty members also told me I wasn't a fit with them, and used the rest of our scheduled meeting time to catch up with each other while I couldn't get an academic word in edgewise.

Afterward, I told the program director how the in-person meetings went (she'd asked). She suggested some other people for me to reach out to, so I emailed four professors. I heard back from one person who's retiring next year, but I haven't heard a peep from the other three in the 2+ weeks since. (I've reached out to each professor twice).

Overall, I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my fit with the department. It's a smaller program, and I've met or reached out to nearly half the faculty already. It seems like faculty sees me as a great match for the department in general, just working with somebody else. Aside from that, I'm just not feeling like I'm being taken seriously - which is kind of weird, because the department's offering me a research fellowship and ~4k more funding than other members of my prospective cohort.

That sounds like a big disconnect between the adcomm and the rest of the faculty. If everyone is telling you that you fit best with someone else, yes, that's a bad sign. It doesn't sound like either A or B is excited to take you on in a primary advising role—is that your impression? Or is each excited to have you but of the impression that you're an even better fit with the other?

The experience with the other two faculty members sounds bizarre. All in all, unless both A and B are falling all over themselves to advise you, I'd be very wary of accepting.

Edited to add: Did A or B have any contact with you (phone, Skype, email) prior to your having been accepted to the program?

Edited April 4, 2017 by BFB

[dumbunny]

37 minutes ago, BFB said:

That sounds like a big disconnect between the adcomm and the rest of the faculty. If everyone is telling you that you fit best with someone else, yes, that's a bad sign. It doesn't sound like either A or B is excited to take you on in a primary advising role—is that your impression? Or is each excited to have you but of the impression that you're an even better fit with the other?

The experience with the other two faculty members sounds bizarre. All in all, unless both A and B are falling all over themselves to advise you, I'd be very wary of accepting.

Edited to add: Did A or B have any contact with you (phone, Skype, email) prior to your having been accepted to the program?

On February 6, the program director sent me an email to notify me that I had been admitted to the program. That was my first interaction with any faculty member.

"It doesn't sound like either A or B is excited to take you on in a primary advising role—is that your impression? Or is each excited to have you but of the impression that you're an even better fit with the other?" - definitely the former. It wasn't "you should also talk with this other person" - it was "you should talk with ___ instead." (Direct quote).

Re: adcomm - I noticed that a couple faculty members were able to recall details from my application with zero prompting on my part. I assume this means these faculty members were either on the adcomm, or at least the adcomm did a good job keeping the general faculty in the loop.

[BFB]

3 minutes ago, dumbunny said:

On February 6, the program director sent me an email to notify me that I had been admitted to the program. That was my first interaction with any faculty member.

"It doesn't sound like either A or B is excited to take you on in a primary advising role—is that your impression? Or is each excited to have you but of the impression that you're an even better fit with the other?" - definitely the former. It wasn't "you should also talk with this other person" - it was "you should talk with ___ instead." (Direct quote).

Re: adcomm - I noticed that a couple faculty members were able to recall details from my application with zero prompting on my part. I assume this means these faculty members were either on the adcomm, or at least the adcomm did a good job keeping the general faculty in the loop.

Only the last part is good news, and it's not great. The upshot is, if there's no one there to work with, don't go... and the "instead" gives me the distinct impression that there's no one there to work with.

[dumbunny]

22 minutes ago, BFB said:

Only the last part is good news, and it's not great. The upshot is, if there's no one there to work with, don't go... and the "instead" gives me the distinct impression that there's no one there to work with.

I think you're right. The bit about the adcomm supports my suspicion that I got admitted because I was seen a great fit for the department in general. People on the adcomm must have thought I could work with a bunch of other people, without actually having any feedback from those other people.

It's disappointing. I really wanted to go here originally and I've been nudging the department to give me a reason to say "yes," but it's hard when people don't answer your emails. Oh well. At least their funding offer is useful for negotiating with another school.

Edited April 4, 2017 by dumbunny

[not@prof_yet]

Hello, thanks so much for the advice you give to prospective students; I know I appreciate it!

 

How do admissions committees view breaks between undergraduate and graduate studies? I will hopefully be applying this fall. December will mark the 2 year mark since I graduated from undergrad, so it will be 2.5 years by the time I start my PhD. I'm particularly worried because they have been unrelated private sector, contract jobs. Will this serve as a hindrance to admissions?

 

Thanks!

[BFB]

1 hour ago, not@prof_yet said:

Hello, thanks so much for the advice you give to prospective students; I know I appreciate it!

 

How do admissions committees view breaks between undergraduate and graduate studies? I will hopefully be applying this fall. December will mark the 2 year mark since I graduated from undergrad, so it will be 2.5 years by the time I start my PhD. I'm particularly worried because they have been unrelated private sector, contract jobs. Will this serve as a hindrance to admissions?

 

Thanks!

Might hurt you a little, but I doubt it'd hurt you much, especially not just a couple of years. I'd just explain the break succinctly and mention whatever prompted you to decide to come back.

[IR44]

Professor B, thanks for taking the time to answer so many questions—it's been very beneficial for me. My question pertains to the importance of formal experience with quantitative methodology. I have a pretty solid Quant GRE (above 90th percentile), but my most advanced quantitative course was introductory statistics, which I took as a high school senior. Since I'm looking at the IR subfield and not theory, how much is this likely to hurt my chances of admission? I won't go into too much detail about my profile, but I feel that generally all other aspects—LoRs, SoP, writing sample— are strong. If this is going to be an overarching issue, I can simply forego my planned writing sample (a case study I completed for my honors thesis) and spend the next months crafting a new sample that includes some form of basic regression, etc. and demonstrates that I'm not completely inept in this area. Despite the lack of formal training in undergrad, I'm mathematically inclined. I'd appreciate any input you have. 

Note: I do plan to incorporate quantitative methods during graduate study, and I mention this in my SoP when discussing how to address a puzzle I posed. 

Edited May 20, 2017 by IR44

[orange turtle]

I am intruding here, as Political Science is not my field...

I wish there was a faculty perspectives' thread for other fields, and also not just for those who are applying. I am already in a program (first year masters, hoping to fast-track to a PhD). Sometimes I worry about disappointing my advisor with my performance but I don't know how to bring it up in a way that is constructive vs I want a pat on the back.

I do think it's great the Political Science faculty have this thread, though. Such a great service to the student community. Thank you.

[Eigen]

1 hour ago, orange turtle said:

I am intruding here, as Political Science is not my field...

I wish there was a faculty perspectives' thread for other fields, and also not just for those who are applying. I am already in a program (first year masters, hoping to fast-track to a PhD). Sometimes I worry about disappointing my advisor with my performance but I don't know how to bring it up in a way that is constructive vs I want a pat on the back.

I do think it's great the Political Science faculty have this thread, though. Such a great service to the student community. Thank you.

You should check/post in the officially grads section. There are faculty from other fields around here, and what you're looking for can also be answered by senior grad students. 

[BFB]

On 5/19/2017 at 10:14 PM, IR44 said:

Professor B, thanks for taking the time to answer so many questions—it's been very beneficial for me. My question pertains to the importance of formal experience with quantitative methodology. I have a pretty solid Quant GRE (above 90th percentile), but my most advanced quantitative course was introductory statistics, which I took as a high school senior. Since I'm looking at the IR subfield and not theory, how much is this likely to hurt my chances of admission? I won't go into too much detail about my profile, but I feel that generally all other aspects—LoRs, SoP, writing sample— are strong. If this is going to be an overarching issue, I can simply forego my planned writing sample (a case study I completed for my honors thesis) and spend the next months crafting a new sample that includes some form of basic regression, etc. and demonstrates that I'm not completely inept in this area. Despite the lack of formal training in undergrad, I'm mathematically inclined. I'd appreciate any input you have. 

Note: I do plan to incorporate quantitative methods during graduate study, and I mention this in my SoP when discussing how to address a puzzle I posed. 

Honestly, I wouldn't worry too much. We tend to look at quant GRE as an indicator of potential to do well in stats courses. Actual stats courses are a bonus, but their absence doesn't really hurt your prospects.

[polsgoals]

Hello!

I am applying to PhD programs in political science/government and was wondering if you could take a look at my profile to see if I would be a competitive candidate. I did my undergrad at a top 25 public research university and had a 3.4 GPA. After working on a congressional campaign, I started teaching at an urban title 1 school. While teaching full-time I got my MA and had a 3.6 GPA. My GRE scores are solid (V-165, Q-168) and I have good letters from 2 professors in my MA program, 1 from my assistant principal at the school I teach at, and 1 from the congressman I worked for.

My question is this: will my low GPA be prohibitive when applying to top PhD programs? Will my experience as a school teacher be viewed favorably? Will I be an attractive applicant at top programs? Is there anything obvious that I should be doing to improve my profile and make myself a better candidate?

Thanks in advance for your insight!

[BFB]

16 hours ago, polsgoals said:

Hello!

I am applying to PhD programs in political science/government and was wondering if you could take a look at my profile to see if I would be a competitive candidate. I did my undergrad at a top 25 public research university and had a 3.4 GPA. After working on a congressional campaign, I started teaching at an urban title 1 school. While teaching full-time I got my MA and had a 3.6 GPA. My GRE scores are solid (V-165, Q-168) and I have good letters from 2 professors in my MA program, 1 from my assistant principal at the school I teach at, and 1 from the congressman I worked for.

My question is this: will my low GPA be prohibitive when applying to top PhD programs? Will my experience as a school teacher be viewed favorably? Will I be an attractive applicant at top programs? Is there anything obvious that I should be doing to improve my profile and make myself a better candidate?

Thanks in advance for your insight!

I'm afraid I can't speak to the way that other programs do things or what they see as a plus or a minus. In our case, the MA and Congressional work would probably help and the teaching would be neither here nor there. Statement and letters would weigh more heavily. Our system is a bit unusual (I think) in that we need waivers for anyone with an undergrad GPA below a 3.6, even if they subsequently got advanced degrees from top schools and earned a 4.0 GPA while doing so. It's a quirky holdover requirement that I frankly think should be taken off the books, but as long as it's there it limits our flexibility in such cases. In practice, it doesn't limit it too much, though, so if we liked the rest of your record we'd try to figure out a way to use the waiver.

[not@prof_yet]

Hello,

So I have two very defined, but rather unrelated research interests. How do you recommend talking about this in an SOP? Should I describe both interests equally (i.e. prior research experience, plans for future research, and professors I'd want to work with) or should I tailor each SOP according to whichever field the department most fits? Thanks!

[BFB]

On 8/12/2017 at 6:49 PM, not@prof_yet said:

Hello,

So I have two very defined, but rather unrelated research interests. How do you recommend talking about this in an SOP? Should I describe both interests equally (i.e. prior research experience, plans for future research, and professors I'd want to work with) or should I tailor each SOP according to whichever field the department most fits? Thanks!

It's not worth hiding your research interests if they're going to remain research interests. If you're going to continue to do X and Y, you should say that (while perhaps changing the order depending on a department's strengths). If you're willing to do X and totally drop Y while in graduate school or vice-versa, though, you should feel free to write about X to the schools that are strong in X and Y in the schools that are strong in Y.

[worrypower]

Hello Professor!

I was wondering about the "boost" provided by a non-political science master's. I completed my BA in Political Science, then an MPA-- it wasn't a thesis program, but I did have the opportunity to work with a professor as an RA during the course of my degree. I've also done academic research since then (journal articles and a chapter so far, with a few proposals I'm waiting to hear back on). Turns out-- research actually is what I want to do, professional degree be damned. 

Basically, is it a hindrance to have done a non-thesis/terminal master's if I've subsequently done academic work that backs up my research capacity?

I've been looking at Policy PhDs, but given that there aren't very many of them, I'm looking back to my undergraduate field to explore options further. 

Thanks!

[BFB]

On 8/17/2017 at 4:40 PM, worrypower said:

Hello Professor!

I was wondering about the "boost" provided by a non-political science master's. I completed my BA in Political Science, then an MPA-- it wasn't a thesis program, but I did have the opportunity to work with a professor as an RA during the course of my degree. I've also done academic research since then (journal articles and a chapter so far, with a few proposals I'm waiting to hear back on). Turns out-- research actually is what I want to do, professional degree be damned. 

Basically, is it a hindrance to have done a non-thesis/terminal master's if I've subsequently done academic work that backs up my research capacity?

I've been looking at Policy PhDs, but given that there aren't very many of them, I'm looking back to my undergraduate field to explore options further. 

Thanks!

I don't think it's necessarily a hindrance, and it could well be a plus. If you're applying to political science Ph.D. programs in the hopes of getting a degree that'll help you in public policy, though, I'd be very careful—most programs aren't geared toward doing that, so I'd be sure that there's a strong public policy component to the programs you're exploring.

[Sheldon2017]

Hello all,

I am a Ph.D. student in a low-ranked program and want to transfer, and in fact, apply to a better school (because all schools ask students to apply even if they are already in a doctoral program so it is literally a new application). I have two questions for those who are familiar with this issue. First, do I need to mention in my SOP or CV that I am currently a Ph.D. student? Second, I have a paper under review in a journal which is based on a survey. Also, I published a piece in a very well-known political science blog. Finally, I have collected three original data-sets. Would it help if I highlight them in my SOP?

That will be great if someone who has been on an admission committee can give me some advice.

Thanks in advance.

[sloth_girl]

Dear BFB (or whoever; I'm not picky), 

First of all, thank you for doing this. You're one of the nicest academics, and I loved your iTunesU Data Visualization class. 

1. How important is publishing if you're going from undergrad to PhD? I've published in an undergraduate journal and won 1st overall and 2nd categorically in local conferences, but is that enough for a T25 program? If not, what are some good journals that you've seen undergrads specifically publish in? 

2. All the research I did was independent, though I did have faculty advisors help out. Thus, I was never an RA. Is this problematic? (I was a TA for methods courses beginning at age 18). 

3. Does field work and language count towards anything? I did survey research in East Africa and have studied Swahili for a few years now. 

4. Here's my main question: I'm a bit of an odd case because I'm stuck in Utah while my husband finishes his Master's (bet you can guess my religion and undergrad institution ?). As such, I'm pretty much relegated to private sector work (specifically at a survey platform designing company marketing surveys). Is this going to hurt PhD admission chances? How can I signal to the adcomm that I'm a good fit despite this (highly unwanted and emotionally frustrating) gap year? 

5. Related to the preceding question: will being a woman with a young daughter hurt my chances? I know academics like to think of themselves as progressive, but I have been deliberately cut out of research opportunities due to "being a mom." I'm very stressed psychologically about this. 

6. Should I (a) get LOR writers to address family challlenges/health issues or (b) address those myself in the SOP (and if so, how?). The specific issues were suicide of mother and bed rest during pregnancy that affected grades (though my uGPA/majGPA was 3.93/3.97, so probably it doesn't matter? Without these issues, I suspect I would have published/researched more. 

 

[BFB]

4 hours ago, sierrat said:

Dear BFB (or whoever; I'm not picky), 

First of all, thank you for doing this. You're one of the nicest academics, and I loved your iTunesU Data Visualization class. 

1. How important is publishing if you're going from undergrad to PhD? I've published in an undergraduate journal and won 1st overall and 2nd categorically in local conferences, but is that enough for a T25 program? If not, what are some good journals that you've seen undergrads specifically publish in? 

2. All the research I did was independent, though I did have faculty advisors help out. Thus, I was never an RA. Is this problematic? (I was a TA for methods courses beginning at age 18). 

3. Does field work and language count towards anything? I did survey research in East Africa and have studied Swahili for a few years now. 

4. Here's my main question: I'm a bit of an odd case because I'm stuck in Utah while my husband finishes his Master's (bet you can guess my religion and undergrad institution ?). As such, I'm pretty much relegated to private sector work (specifically at a survey platform designing company marketing surveys). Is this going to hurt PhD admission chances? How can I signal to the adcomm that I'm a good fit despite this (highly unwanted and emotionally frustrating) gap year? 

5. Related to the preceding question: will being a woman with a young daughter hurt my chances? I know academics like to think of themselves as progressive, but I have been deliberately cut out of research opportunities due to "being a mom." I'm very stressed psychologically about this. 

6. Should I (a) get LOR writers to address family challlenges/health issues or (b) address those myself in the SOP (and if so, how?). The specific issues were suicide of mother and bed rest during pregnancy that affected grades (though my uGPA/majGPA was 3.93/3.97, so probably it doesn't matter? Without these issues, I suspect I would have published/researched more. 

 

8

Why, thank you! The course is a lot of fun. And my condolences on the loss of your mother.

Let me take these in order:

1. Publications are nice, but we don't expect them from our applicants. The profile you describe sounds competitive—conferences are generally a good sign that you understand what you're getting yourself into.

2. Not a problem.

3. If it's related to your proposed course of study, it'd be directly relevant; otherwise, it'd be indicative of your overall abilities. Counts for something either way.

4. A gap year in and of itself shouldn't hurt your chances anywhere. Lots of people sample the waters elsewhere before deciding to return to academia, and I don't think it's taken as an indicator of much of anything. As to the reason for your gap year, let me bundle it with the next answer.

5-6. Whether or not to discuss family is a really tricky question. I would love to say that you won't face discrimination in Ph.D. admissions due to family status. And most of the academics I know would, I'm pretty sure, bend over backward to avoid discrimination on that or any other basis. I can't make that guarantee, though, and I don't want to pretend that I can. I can promise you that anyone who raises it on our Admissions Committee will be informed in no uncertain terms that it's not an admissible criterion. That sort of thing really pisses me off.

What does that imply for a general strategy? I've seen people go in a couple of different directions that make sense to me.

The first is to set up a firewall between your professional and personal life during the admissions process and be extremely selective about what, if anything, gets through. Your personal life is personal—it isn't relevant to your application. You needn't mention your marital status at all, and in fact questions about marital status, number of children, sexual orientation, health, etc. are very likely illegal in an admissions process. (You typically do get asked about race for diversity purposes, but answering should always be optional.) You are well within your rights to answer such questions with "I don't believe you're allowed to ask that question." If you feel the need to explain the deficits that you perceive (though, per 1., I really don't think they're deficits and I doubt they'll hurt you much at all), having a letter-writer mention the suicide of your mother would most likely be sufficient to get people to cut you some slack. Other than that, you don't need to mention anything. You can even take your wedding ring off in advance and let the mark fade if it makes you feel more comfortable. Your marital status is none of anyone's business.

The second is almost the reverse: to use information about your personal status as a screening mechanism to help you narrow down your choices. In this strategy, you make a point of mentioning the details of your personal life under the assumption that, if a department discriminates against you on that basis, it's not a department that you'd want to be a part of. If they go out of their way to help (by asking about whether they can help advise you about a position for your husband, about day care, etc.), you might be more inclined to go there. That said, I should emphasize that the people on the admissions committee are not always (or even usually) going to be the people on your dissertation committee. For that reason, a variant on this strategy is to mention your personal details only to your person or people of interest, in order to flush out their reaction. Set up a call or initiate an email exchange to discuss the department and ask how well you'd fit, and on your list of questions include the question of whether the city is family-friendly, or something along those lines.

You can weigh the pros and cons of each strategy as it relates to your own situation. I've seen both work well. Either way, if you do face the sort of discrimination that you've faced in the past when it comes to research opportunities or anything else, do not hesitate to raise the issue with your advisor, your DGS, and/or your chair. The people in those positions should have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to such behavior.

Edited November 27, 2017 by BFB

[BFB]

On 11/8/2017 at 11:09 AM, Sheldon2017 said:

Hello all,

I am a Ph.D. student in a low-ranked program and want to transfer, and in fact, apply to a better school (because all schools ask students to apply even if they are already in a doctoral program so it is literally a new application). I have two questions for those who are familiar with this issue. First, do I need to mention in my SOP or CV that I am currently a Ph.D. student? Second, I have a paper under review in a journal which is based on a survey. Also, I published a piece in a very well-known political science blog. Finally, I have collected three original data-sets. Would it help if I highlight them in my SOP?

That will be great if someone who has been on an admission committee can give me some advice.

Thanks in advance.

Sorry, I just realized that I missed this one somehow! You should mention your current status as a Ph.D. student on your c.v., at a minimum; you'll also be asked to send transcripts, and I'd assume (?) that some of your letter-writers will be from this program, so I don't see any point in trying to hide it. Second, yes, you should definitely mention those things in your SOP.

[sloth_girl]

Thank you so much, BFB! I think you significantly helped lower my blood pressure ?. 

[Sheldon2017]

2 hours ago, BFB said:

Sorry, I just realized that I missed this one somehow! You should mention your current status as a Ph.D. student on your c.v., at a minimum; you'll also be asked to send transcripts, and I'd assume (?) that some of your letter-writers will be from this program, so I don't see any point in trying to hide it. Second, yes, you should definitely mention those things in your SOP.

Thank you so much for the reply. Would it be a big problem if I do not have a recommendation letter from my professors? The problem is that my advisor or generally, the department wouldn't  be happy with me or any other student to leave the program so it is really risky for me to tell them I want to leave because it puts me in an uncertain situation (what if I couldn't get into any program?). My standing is not bad (3.8 GPA) and I will send my transcripts for sure. I will get one of my letters from a professor with whom I took an anthropology course and two others from my master and undergraduate teachers. So, do you think the admission committee won't take my application seriously if I don't have letters from my PhD political science professors?

[polsgoals]

Hello!

So I'm applying to phd programs in political science and generally think my profile is pretty good (I have a good personal statement and writing sample, decent gpa, and am proud of my gre scores) my only concern is with one letter of recommendation. I've been out of school for nearly a decade and kept in touch with and have fabulous letters from two professors but my third LOR is from my employer. I know it's a great, and very supportive, LOR but am concerned that because it isn't from a university faculty member I will be at a disadvantage. Does anyone have any insight into this?

 

Thanks!

 

[BFB]

15 hours ago, polsgoals said:

Hello!

So I'm applying to phd programs in political science and generally think my profile is pretty good (I have a good personal statement and writing sample, decent gpa, and am proud of my gre scores) my only concern is with one letter of recommendation. I've been out of school for nearly a decade and kept in touch with and have fabulous letters from two professors but my third LOR is from my employer. I know it's a great, and very supportive, LOR but am concerned that because it isn't from a university faculty member I will be at a disadvantage. Does anyone have any insight into this?

 

Thanks!

 

Again, I can only speak for myself, but this strikes me as actually being better than three faculty members from 10 years ago. It's very helpful to have one more up-to-date reference, at least.