Chicago CIR

[PoliSci Guy]

I received a rejection from Chicago's Ph.D. program today with an offer of admission into their CIR masters. While I'm still holding onto a bit of hope for a Ph.D. I have to consider this as a possibility. Do any of you know anything about their CIR program? Reputation? Quality? I figure that if I don't get into a Ph.D. program I might as well move on to a masters and Chicago should be an excellent choice. The problem is that I haven't given it much thought until now and I don't have as much info as I'd like. Thoughts?

[natofone]

Hi Guy. I am a Chicago CIR alum. Feel free to PM any specific questions.

[adaptations]

I am currently in the program and know a number of other posters on the board (who have had great success applying this year) also did CIR. I think it is a great way to continue your education, make connections within the academe that can lead to great letters of rec., and it definitely looks good when reapplying to PhD programs in the future. It also gives you a great feel for what a PhD program will be like, which is great for people who thought they wanted to do a PhD and decided it wasn't for them (saves them allot of time, plus they have a good MA for the job market). In my case, CIR simply affirmed my desire to earn a PhD and helped me get into some great schools.

If you have specific question feel free to PM me. Also, I recommend coming to the visit day to meet current students, advisors, and faculty and to get a feel for the school.

Cheers,

[expatbayern]

CIR worked out for me--I did my undergrad at a lower-ranked LAC, and I don't know how much weight my letters carried. At the end of a year at Chicago, I had all new letters, plus my MA Thesis as a writing sample (and it was definitely better than my BA Thesis). Plus I've shown I can hack it in grad school (and you'll be taking mostly PhD level coursework, in classes with the Poli Sci PhDs, unlike some terminal MA programs where you're totally segregated).

One strength is a lot of flexibility. There are two required courses (IPE core and Security core), of which I opted out of one (they really don't care as long as you've got some rationale), and otherwise you're free to do whatever. I did half of my courses at the Harris School (boning up on formal and methods), others took courses at the Law School or GSB, while some stayed entirely in the Poli Sci department.

Also good: in my experience, all the big names in the department are willing to supervise MA Theses and treat CIR students as basically equal to the PhD students. Make sure the folks you want to work with are still going to be around next year, though.

[expatbayern]

Oh, except if your ultimate goal is to get into Chicago, I don't know if CIR works. I was just talking with another member of my CIR cohort at UCSD's visit weekend. Both of us were unceremoniously rejected (but also both admitted to multiple places we were more excited about attending, so no real loss). That may just be something about this year, but who knows if next year will be better?

[natofone]

Two of the 'second-year option' people from my year ended up getting into Chicago. It won't make or break your application to Chicago, but it is by no means a stepping stone into the program.

[IRdreams]

Did anyone else get admitted to this program after specifically declining to be considered for it?

[yuhoolio]

I'm into CIR with funding for an MA and I also like the flexibility. But I'm also into Tufts Fletcher MALD and Yale for an MA in IR, which I prefer (but no funding). I don't want to go into academia, so I did not put a high preference on Chicago. Should I still really consider it over these other schools?

[natofone]

Most people from my cohort at uchicago did NOT go into academia. Of the 45 or so, three are in PhD programs at this point. Most people went on to work in washington for some type of government agency, research group, or something along those lines.

[UVaSpades]

adaptations and expatbayern: How did applications for Ph.D. programs work out for you? I mean, did you apply while at the beginning of the first year of the program, second year (if you're in it), or after you were finished? Like PoliSci Guy, I also got into CIR while being rejected for the Ph.D. program, and I'm curious what the path towards a Ph.D. has been like for you guys.

[adaptations]

UWSpades: The advice that the CIR advisors give is to wait until you finish the program and then apply. I think this is sound advice and gives you the best chance of success and maximizes the value of your time at CIR. That said, I ignored their advice and applied while in the program, which is a crazy amount of work, but doable. The problems with reapplying while in the program are 1) you won't have grades from the program in time for your applications 2) you won't have much time to build relationships with faculty to get strong letters of rec. and 3) you probably won't have a new well-developed writting sample. If I were you, I would wait to apply until after you have finished the program. Also, it might be nice having a year off between the MA and PhD to give you some down time and the time to concentrate on applications.

I hope this helps.

Cheers,

[expatbayern]

adaptations and expatbayern: How did applications for Ph.D. programs work out for you? I mean, did you apply while at the beginning of the first year of the program, second year (if you're in it), or after you were finished? Like PoliSci Guy, I also got into CIR while being rejected for the Ph.D. program, and I'm curious what the path towards a Ph.D. has been like for you guys.

Applied after I was done--my MA thesis was my writing sample and all of my recommenders were from Chicago.

[UVaSpades]

UWSpades: The advice that the CIR advisors give is to wait until you finish the program and then apply. I think this is sound advice and gives you the best chance of success and maximizes the value of your time at CIR. That said, I ignored their advice and applied while in the program, which is a crazy amount of work, but doable. The problems with reapplying while in the program are 1) you won't have grades from the program in time for your applications 2) you won't have much time to build relationships with faculty to get strong letters of rec. and 3) you probably won't have a new well-developed writting sample. If I were you, I would wait to apply until after you have finished the program. Also, it might be nice having a year off between the MA and PhD to give you some down time and the time to concentrate on applications.

I hope this helps.

Cheers,

Applied after I was done--my MA thesis was my writing sample and all of my recommenders were from Chicago.

Alright, that puts things into perspective a bit. Two other questions, and I'll leave you guys alone for now. >_> When it comes to CIR, are there certain things that are more helpful for getting into a Ph.D. program than others? For example, I'm wondering if it might not be a bad idea to take a class on, say, linear models or statistics for research purposes, to look more prepared for the rigors of a Ph.D. program. Otherwise there are some workshops on security policy and/or realism that I think I would really like to take. Second, and this is also for natofone if he's still reading this thread, are the people that are focusing primarily on academia a distinct minority, and how is that treated by the faculty? Thank you guys again for your input, it really has been a lot of help allaying my concerns.

[expatbayern]

Alright, that puts things into perspective a bit. Two other questions, and I'll leave you guys alone for now. >_> When it comes to CIR, are there certain things that are more helpful for getting into a Ph.D. program than others? For example, I'm wondering if it might not be a bad idea to take a class on, say, linear models or statistics for research purposes, to look more prepared for the rigors of a Ph.D. program. Otherwise there are some workshops on security policy and/or realism that I think I would really like to take. Second, and this is also for natofone if he's still reading this thread, are the people that are focusing primarily on academia a distinct minority, and how is that treated by the faculty? Thank you guys again for your input, it really has been a lot of help allaying my concerns.

I took a couple of formal modeling courses and thought they helped--some quant methods definitely would as well.

Make sure the people you want to work with are going to be there, though. Glaser is leaving and Snidal may as well. That makes the IR group Lipson, Mearsheimer, and Pape--fairly small and not covering large chunks of the subfield. That obviously doesn't matter as much for a one-year MA as for a PhD--I think John Mearsheimer could still supervise a good MA thesis and write a strong letter, for example.

[natofone]

Alright, that puts things into perspective a bit. Two other questions, and I'll leave you guys alone for now. >_> When it comes to CIR, are there certain things that are more helpful for getting into a Ph.D. program than others? For example, I'm wondering if it might not be a bad idea to take a class on, say, linear models or statistics for research purposes, to look more prepared for the rigors of a Ph.D. program. Otherwise there are some workshops on security policy and/or realism that I think I would really like to take. Second, and this is also for natofone if he's still reading this thread, are the people that are focusing primarily on academia a distinct minority, and how is that treated by the faculty? Thank you guys again for your input, it really has been a lot of help allaying my concerns.

In regards to statistics/linear regression at Chicago, it might be difficult. You only get one or two pure electives and many people use it as an independent study to complete their thesis. You won't get much out of one political science stats course at Chicago. It definitely won't get you 'up and running,' but it will help with reading the quantitative literature so that you can make sense of the jargon. The intro courses in political science were a bit too impractical and theoretical, so I took did my statistical training in sociology instead so that I could actually do a quantitative thesis. This definitely wouldn't have been possible in the first poli sci stats course. You'd be better off taking more reading seminars and building strong relationships with faculty that will translate into good letters. Be strategic about it and pick out full professors that have clout in the field.

There seemed to be a distinct hierarchy in terms of how faculty dealt with different types of students. PhD Poli Sci > PhD not Poli Sci > CIR > Public Policy MAs > MAPSS (general social science degree). I had a professor absolutely flake out on a letter of recommendation despite getting an A in his course , but several others have been extremely helpful. At times it was difficult to get into the political science PhD-level courses, but if you learned to contact the professors before the first day you were usually given priority over those in your cohort that didn't.