Welcome to the 2013-2014 Cycle

[xuejia]

PSR is useful to pick up some info when the job market first heats up in the fall and when offers start going out around now. Otherwise, it's mostly a place for graduate students to say horrible things. I suspect that the whole board might be just the same 15 people talking to each other over and over.

 

Ohio State's recent stumbles have opened up the conference this year. I am a fan of college basketball and I attend a lot of my school's games (rooting against schools that rejected you is fun). Most grad students don't take advantage of student tickets and that's a shame. It's a great perk to being at a school like this. This is going to be a season where everyone beats up on each other in this conference and people might be surprised to see a bunch of 6-seed Big Ten teams going deep in the tournament.

 

Just to be clear, I don't want to tip my hand on where I go in the unlikely event that I end up saying something unflattering about my program (and I have some strong feelings about what programs don't tell you during visitation weekends and when they are recruiting students in general). It's not all sunshine and roses in graduate school, but if I knew then what I know now I would still apply. The reason I am back on this board is that a friend in in this application cycle. He asked me if he should try for grad school and after thinking about it carefully I told him he should take a shot.

I certainly don't fault you for wishing to remain somewhat anonymous. It's better for us applicants when it puts you at liberty to speak more candidly. Can you speak more specifically about your beef with visitation and recruitment? 

 

And I have every intention of scoring student tickets, even if the school can't ball.

 

I actually lolled when I read about The Bible (King Gary Version), and several other times, too, but not a treasure trove of useful or thoughtful information.

[BigTenPoliSci]

I certainly don't fault you for wishing to remain somewhat anonymous. It's better for us applicants when it puts you at liberty to speak more candidly. Can you speak more specifically about your beef with visitation and recruitment? 

 

And I have every intention of scoring student tickets, even if the school can't ball.

 

I actually lolled when I read about The Bible (King Gary Version), and several other times, too, but not a treasure trove of useful or thoughtful information.

My beef with visitation is mostly the evasive discussions of placement. I was accepted at 2 places. I visited both. Both programs that otherwise have a very quantitative focus (particularly in my subfield - American) suddenly became very qualitative when the topic of placement came up. Anecdotes of great placements are quickly recalled, but no one mentions the other great students that didn't get any offers and are now on their second post-doc.

 

The reality when you are in a program like this one (upper teens / low twenties in the rankings) is that about two thirds of a cohort will defend dissertations. Of those, about half will find tenure track jobs. Most importantly, it varies quite a bit by subfield and by advisor. When you visit, ask specific questions about subfield placement. "How many Americanists were on the market last year? How many placed and where?" You might have a very good idea of who your advisor might be. Ask her about her placement record. "Who was your most recent student to finish? Where did he go?"

 

When you are visiting you are in the driver's seat. Ask for more money. Ask for a longer guarantee. Unless you set fire to the building during your visit they won't rescind the admissions offer. After the admission offer and before you accept is the only time for the next six years that you are in the dominant position.

[IR IR IR PhD]

My beef with visitation is mostly the evasive discussions of placement. I was accepted at 2 places. I visited both. Both programs that otherwise have a very quantitative focus (particularly in my subfield - American) suddenly became very qualitative when the topic of placement came up. Anecdotes of great placements are quickly recalled, but no one mentions the other great students that didn't get any offers and are now on their second post-doc.

 

The reality when you are in a program like this one (upper teens / low twenties in the rankings) is that about two thirds of a cohort will defend dissertations. Of those, about half will find tenure track jobs. Most importantly, it varies quite a bit by subfield and by advisor. When you visit, ask specific questions about subfield placement. "How many Americanists were on the market last year? How many placed and where?" You might have a very good idea of who your advisor might be. Ask her about her placement record. "Who was your most recent student to finish? Where did he go?"

 

When you are visiting you are in the driver's seat. Ask for more money. Ask for a longer guarantee. Unless you set fire to the building during your visit they won't rescind the admissions offer. After the admission offer and before you accept is the only time for the next six years that you are in the dominant position.

 

Eye-opening honesty! Thanks! In your experience however do additional money requests ever get honored? Do you dare specifically leverage one program against the other?

[BigTenPoliSci]

I should have been more clear. You won't get a bigger stipend - those are usually fixed based on your type of appointment. But you might change a two year TA guarantee into a four year TA guarantee. Or you might bump a four year TA deal to a first year fellowship plus a four year TA.

 

Absolutely play one program against another. A couple people here have especially nice deals because they used the leverage. If Illinois offers you a four year TA package and Minnesota offers you your first two years of fellowship and next two of TA, tell the Director of Graduate Studies at Illinois that Minnesota gave you this better offer. Sometimes the DGS will be able to match it. The worst that can happen is that they do nothing. On the other hand, I wouldn't recommend bluffing. Dishonesty is an especially bad way to start a graduate career. 

 

It's not about playing "hardball" or even being all that strategic. Just be honest and direct about what your options are.

[TorrentOfArdentPathos]

My beef with visitation is mostly the evasive discussions of placement. I was accepted at 2 places. I visited both. Both programs that otherwise have a very quantitative focus (particularly in my subfield - American) suddenly became very qualitative when the topic of placement came up. Anecdotes of great placements are quickly recalled, but no one mentions the other great students that didn't get any offers and are now on their second post-doc.

 

The reality when you are in a program like this one (upper teens / low twenties in the rankings) is that about two thirds of a cohort will defend dissertations. Of those, about half will find tenure track jobs. Most importantly, it varies quite a bit by subfield and by advisor. When you visit, ask specific questions about subfield placement. "How many Americanists were on the market last year? How many placed and where?" You might have a very good idea of who your advisor might be. Ask her about her placement record. "Who was your most recent student to finish? Where did he go?"

 

When you are visiting you are in the driver's seat. Ask for more money. Ask for a longer guarantee. Unless you set fire to the building during your visit they won't rescind the admissions offer. After the admission offer and before you accept is the only time for the next six years that you are in the dominant position.

 How do you think that most programs would respond to a request for a list of all placements, students who defended, and students who entered for the last X years?  (Or if I asked directly for the placement and attrition ratios I'm clearly after?)  

 

I feel like that is a reasonable request, but you seem to be implying that you had trouble getting more than anecdotes...

[BigTenPoliSci]

 How do you think that most programs would respond to a request for a list of all placements, students who defended, and students who entered for the last X years?  (Or if I asked directly for the placement and attrition ratios I'm clearly after?)  

 

I feel like that is a reasonable request, but you seem to be implying that you had trouble getting more than anecdotes...

I don't think that's an unreasonable request. Some places are especially transparent, others aren't. 

 

In terms of completion, even though between one third and one half of my cohort won't finish a PhD, that doesn't mean they left graduate school and took up residence in a cardboard box underneath a highway overpass. People leave to care for a close family member got cancer but then they later do something great, they grab great opportunities in the private sector, they take a position in a major political campaign, or their partner got an amazing job in Switzerland, etc... Completing a PhD is mostly a function of events in your life and your choices.

 

As an individual applicant, what you care about is what happens to people in your subfield coming out of that school. Within your subfield, and in the past five years, where are all of their PhD's? If they can't give you an answer then something is wrong. If they honestly don't know that is an alarming signal about their commitment to placement. If they know but they aren't telling you, then they might not be too proud of their true placement record. 

 

I suspect that programs are a little evasive about placement with prospective students because prospects often have unrealistic expectations. The odds of an incoming graduate student in a 20-ish ranked program coming out of that program and landing in a tenure track job is well short of 50/50 (and even being in a top 5 program isn't the guarantee it once was, either). There is a disincentive to be honest and appear glum to the prospects when the program down the road is painting a rosy and unrealistic picture.

[BigTenPoliSci]

See? This is why I stayed anonymous. I've spent the past hour portraying DGS's at graduate programs as dishonest snake oil salesmen.

 

Despite all of this, I am happy that I am in graduate school working on a PhD in political science. The work never stops, but it's better than shoveling coal. If I strike out on the academic job market, I still have options.

[anxious2151]

I don't think that's an unreasonable request. Some places are especially transparent, others aren't. 

 

In terms of completion, even though between one third and one half of my cohort won't finish a PhD, that doesn't mean they left graduate school and took up residence in a cardboard box underneath a highway overpass. People leave to care for a close family member got cancer but then they later do something great, they grab great opportunities in the private sector, they take a position in a major political campaign, or their partner got an amazing job in Switzerland, etc... Completing a PhD is mostly a function of events in your life and your choices.

 

As an individual applicant, what you care about is what happens to people in your subfield coming out of that school. Within your subfield, and in the past five years, where are all of their PhD's? If they can't give you an answer then something is wrong. If they honestly don't know that is an alarming signal about their commitment to placement. If they know but they aren't telling you, then they might not be too proud of their true placement record. 

 

I suspect that programs are a little evasive about placement with prospective students because prospects often have unrealistic expectations. The odds of an incoming graduate student in a 20-ish ranked program coming out of that program and landing in a tenure track job is well short of 50/50 (and even being in a top 5 program isn't the guarantee it once was, either). There is a disincentive to be honest and appear glum to the prospects when the program down the road is painting a rosy and unrealistic picture.

 

Thanks for your insight on this. I'm curious - schools usually post their placement info online. Is this not the entire picture (are they picking and choosing who to list/not including a bunch of people who didn't place well)?

[BigTenPoliSci]

Thanks for your insight on this. I'm curious - schools usually post their placement info online. Is this not the entire picture (are they picking and choosing who to list/not including a bunch of people who didn't place well)?

There just isn't a standard for this info. If a student defends her dissertation, bounces around through two post-docs, then lands a tenure-track job at a Middle Wyoming State University, most programs will update their info after those two years and call that a tenure track placement. Is that a tenure-track placement? Sort of. When another student defends and takes a political consulting job that only required a bachelor's degree, that is often called a placement. 

 

In the defense of programs' propensity to get qualitative in these discussions, placement is a slippery concept. The best way to get the true picture is to ask that POI on visitation weekend, "Tell me about each one of your advisees in the past five years." Some of those stories might not end in a tenure-track job, but still be very cool outcomes.

[AmericanQuant]

If they had 400 apps for an incoming class of 20, their admission rate likely will be between 7-10%, which doesn't seem much lower than many other (lower-ranked) schools. Berkeley and Michigan both had less in 2012... I wonder if they call internationals, though. They were meeting for the first time last week, so they could make their decisions soon!

 You will absolutely positively not hear anything from Stanford until after February 13th.

[aecp]

 You will absolutely positively not hear anything from Stanford until after February 13th.

Thanks for sharing.  Care to share more....Your message is very cryptic.

 

Thanks!

[anxious2151]

 You will absolutely positively not hear anything from Stanford until after February 13th.

 

Darn! Is this your way of saying that Feb 13th is the day when everything is finalized and calls will go out?      Dangerous possibility of a crappy valentines day present...

[IRToni]

Quiet again...

You will absolutely positively not hear anything from Stanford until after February 13th.

What's your source for that?

[MiroslavBass]

So which universities have already accepted or declined? None of my 10 universities replied yet.

[IRToni]

So which universities have already accepted or declined? None of my 10 universities replied yet.

Wisconsin, OSU, UCD, Duke, GMU (?) were the big hitters so far, I think. None of my schools have sent anything, from what I gather.

[IRToni]

Looks like one of my professors did not submit his reference to one of my courses... Strange, because when I last checked, the reference showed up as received, but now, it's gone... Checking again! Such a mess...

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Looks like one of my professors did not submit his reference to one of my courses... Strange, because when I last checked, the reference showed up as received, but now, it's gone... Checking again! Such a mess...

 

You mean to one of your Unis? As you know, this happened to me just the other day. The school permitted a late upload, even though they're already in committee (so it may or may not matter). Do your best to be in touch with the school - you never do know!

[xuejia]

You mean to one of your Unis? As you know, this happened to me just the other day. The school permitted a late upload, even though they're already in committee (so it may or may not matter). Do your best to be in touch with the school - you never do know!

And I was able to supply a missing writing sample to get right into the committee's stack. If you have the slightest relationship with anyone in the department, even just somebody who responded to an email in a friendly manner, go to that person about fixing your application. You'd be amazed how easy it is for someone to 'put a note in your file' late in the game.

[IRToni]

They just withdrew my app. Currently on the phone trying to figure it out...

[IRToni]

Got it reinstated, reference is submitted! Thanks every1 for your kind words!

[boazczoine]

Got it reinstated, reference is submitted! Thanks every1 for your kind words!

 

Drama-rama! Glad it got worked out

Edited January 30, 2014 by boazczoine

[xuejia]

A Wuffle and Kristine Coulter (2014). Is Political Science Meant for Every Tom, Dick, or Harriet? The Role of First Names and Middle Initials as Predictors of Academic Success . PS: Political Science & Politics, 47, pp 173-176. doi:10.1017/S1049096513001522. 

 

^ Read it. Every bit as stupid as it sounds.

[catchermiscount]

A Wuffle and Kristine Coulter (2014). Is Political Science Meant for Every Tom, Dick, or Harriet? The Role of First Names and Middle Initials as Predictors of Academic Success . PS: Political Science & Politics, 47, pp 173-176. doi:10.1017/S1049096513001522. 

 

^ Read it. Every bit as stupid as it sounds.

 

I thought it was a fine piece of scholarship.

[IRToni]

I love the name "A Wuffle"...

[mv0027]

A Wuffle and Kristine Coulter (2014). Is Political Science Meant for Every Tom, Dick, or Harriet? The Role of First Names and Middle Initials as Predictors of Academic Success . PS: Political Science & Politics, 47, pp 173-176. doi:10.1017/S1049096513001522. 

 

^ Read it. Every bit as stupid as it sounds.

Geez. This is real?

 

Might as well call it, "Is Political Science meant for upper-income, white males?" 

 

Very disappointing.