Interdisciplinary vs disciplinary PhD

[IRToni]

Dear all, so far, you've been a tremendous help, so I thought I would collect some more opinions/info about the interdisciplinary vs disciplinary PhD divide. My interests lie in Political Economy, where a number of schools offer specialized PhD programs (Harvard, Stanford, UCSD come to mind immediately), and I'm currently struggling with deciding where to apply.

 

I'm currently doing a M.A. in Political Science, and many of the courses that I'm taking are comparable to PhD courses in the US (European M.A., where M.A. and PhD students take mostly the same classes - I also checked using some online syllabi from UCSD, many of them are very similar in terms of workload and content). My current interest is the foreign economic policy, especially the political economy of foreign investment from emerging countries. I definitely want to look at it from a focused political-economic POV, but also employ Game Theory and econometric analysis, so taking advanced Econ classes would be really beneficial to me. I also think that since I already have a M.A. in Political Science, getting a M.A. in Econ/Pol Econ might be useful, especially if academia doesn't work out. My language skills and topic can also translate into a good priivate sector career, and this might be a stepping stone. On the other hand, I would prefer to stay in academia/the Think tank world, and would, I think, prefer teaching Political Science/international affairs to teaching economics...

 

My top program currently is the Princeton program, where I can do the Political Scince PhD with a major in Political Economy, and, I heard, also get an Econ master en route, assuming I take the appropriate coursework. NYU also has a designated field, which I like, but for UCSD, Harvard and Stanford, I'm struggling. At UCSD, my ideal supervisor is in the IR/PS school, but I heard they're allowed to supervise both. For Stanford, my POIs are mostly located in the PoliSci school, so I'm not sure. Harvard is pretty much an even split, and I just don't really see where to apply at these three schools.

 

Thanks in advance,

IRToni

[jazzrap]

I wonder if Stanford GSB would be an option? Note that a lot of PE stuff are taught in business schools in the States. If you are interested in PE, then Stanford GSB, Chicago Harris, Northwestern Kellogg come to my mind immediately. They have great placement record in terms of producing political scientists. 

[RWBG]

If you want to do political economy understood substantively (i.e. not formal theory like jazzrap is talking about) then Stanford would be a good choice, but not necessarily Stanford GSB (although you could take courses there). As far as the value of interdisciplinary programs, I think what you want to do is choose a program that allows you to get the training you want (e.g. take courses in economics, game theory, statistics, etc.) and has advisors who can supervise a dissertation that engages in a sophisticated fashion with economics, political science, game theory, and econometrics. I would do this instead of focusing on whether the program is officially interdisciplinary or not in name. In general, the program name just affects how easily people can slot you into particular roles when you apply for jobs; something like IR/comparative, even if virtually all your courses are political economy and economics courses, may position you better on the job market than political economy, because people will be better convinced you can teach their standard IR and comparative classes.

Off the top of my head, I'd say good schools to do your kind of work would probably include Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Michigan, UCSD, UCLA (if you want to work with Rogowski), NYU, Wisconsin-Madison, Emory. Rochester would train you well in game theory and stats, but Randy Stone's the only one there who does political economy (and even then, it's more IO that political economy) so you'd have to be a bit of a self-starter on the political economy stuff. Trade-offs and all.

Edited June 23, 2013 by RWBG

[jazzrap]

If you want to do political economy understood substantively (i.e. not formal theory like jazzrap is talking about) then Stanford would be a good choice, but not necessarily Stanford GSB (although you could take courses there). As far as the value of interdisciplinary programs, I think what you want to do is choose a program that allows you to get the training you want (e.g. take courses in economics, game theory, statistics, etc.) and has advisors who can supervise a dissertation that engages in a sophisticated fashion with economics, political science, game theory, and econometrics. I would do this instead of focusing on whether the program is officially interdisciplinary or not in name. In general, the program name just affects how easily people can slot you into particular roles when you apply for jobs; something like IR/comparative, even if virtually all your courses are political economy and economics courses, may position you better on the job market than political economy, because people will be better convinced you can teach their standard IR and comparative classes.

Off the top of my head, I'd say good schools to do your kind of work would probably include Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Michigan, UCSD, UCLA (if you want to work with Rogowski), NYU, Wisconsin-Madison, Emory. Rochester would train you well in game theory and stats, but Randy Stone's the only one there who does political economy (and even then, it's more IO that political economy) so you'd have to be a bit of a self-starter on the political economy stuff. Trade-offs and all.

Thank you for the clarification. I guess I was confused between PE in the substantive sense and PE in the methodological sense. 

[IRToni]

@RWGB: Thanks. A lot of the programs you mentioned are definitely on my list (Berkeley instead of UCLA though, bc of my regional focus). Not Rochester either, bc they don't have so in my regional focus nor a real IPE person.

 

My question was especially about the schools where both programs exist, i.e. Harvard, Stanford and UCSD, which one might be more appropriate, or more broadly, how to choose between two programs at the same school. Any more tips on that?

[catchermiscount]

Regions?  We don't need no regions!  I DON'T HAVE TO SHOW YOU ANY STINKIN' REGIONS!!!

[RWBG]

@RWGB: Thanks. A lot of the programs you mentioned are definitely on my list (Berkeley instead of UCLA though, bc of my regional focus). Not Rochester either, bc they don't have so in my regional focus nor a real IPE person.

 

My question was especially about the schools where both programs exist, i.e. Harvard, Stanford and UCSD, which one might be more appropriate, or more broadly, how to choose between two programs at the same school. Any more tips on that?

 

My apologies, I misunderstood. Stanford GSB has a political economy program, but it's basically is designed to train formal theorists (it's not political economy understood substantively, really) so I'd do the regular stream in the political science department. Take a look at Maggie Peters' CV for a good guide to doing political economy at Stanford. Harvard's PEG program looks great; couldn't you apply to both it and the Government program? I don't know what your math background is like, but keep in mind that expectations for these specialized programs may be closer to those of economics departments; if you don't have a solid background in, at minimum, calculus and linear algebra, it may be tougher to gain admission. As to UCSD, I don't think it'll matter much which you choose. Faculty probably don't care which program you're in, and the IR/PS Ph.D looks like it has most of its coursework in the political science department. I think I saw a thread somewhere on gradcafe about this though, so you could do a search for that if you haven't already done so.

[socioeconomist]

Toni, 

 

I believe that Stanford GSB, Harvard and Princeton are indeed great choices for you. At Princeton, for instance, they have a joint program for Political Economy with common classes for both economists and political scientists. At the same time, you are still formally enrolled at either department, so you can remain an IR or comparative guy for the employment. Anyway, all these schools are really tough to get in, so try hard and good luck with it

 

Just out of curiosity, what school are you at right now? (just PM me)

[eponine997]

My question was especially about the schools where both programs exist, i.e. Harvard, Stanford and UCSD, which one might be more appropriate, or more broadly, how to choose between two programs at the same school. Any more tips on that?

 

Have you considered talking directly with the programs?  Particularly if you've already identified POIs at these particular schools (who may or may not be affiliated with both programs) and you have a clear idea of what you want to study.  Why not send an email, "hi i am considering applying to your school/program, these are my interests, these are my long term goals, this is my background, however, I am unsure at which program I might be a better fit because after thoroughly research each program... blah blah blah"  I would imagine no one can give you better advice on this than the people who are admitting/teaching/advising students in the programs.  Though I would suggest that you a) demonstrate that you HAVE thoroughly researched each program and thought seriously about how you'd fit in (for example you don't want to say you've had one term of calculus and are unsure which to apply to when the PE program requires several math courses beyond the calc series or some other similarly obvious distinction that can be found the program website); and b ) don't take it personally if you don't get a response, profs are busy people and not all respond to prospective grad students (i.e. lack of response is not a good reason to rule out a program).  

 

Regions?  We don't need no regions!  I DON'T HAVE TO SHOW YOU ANY STINKIN' REGIONS!!!

**resisting the urge to make a "Rochester good" joke**

[steedyue]

IR/PS does not fund new students since 2008. What I know is most PhD students affiliated with IRPS are actually enrolled into Political Science Department.

[IRToni]

So I've basically decided to go for POlitical Science at Stanford and UCSD (where, if I really feel it's not the right fit, I could also switch to the IR/PS joint program). I'm currently considering applying to both Government and PEG at Harvard, but can't seem to open two application on the Harvard GSAS. Does anyone have any tips? I could probably submit one, and then do the other, but don't want to inconvenience my letter writers with that!

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

So I've basically decided to go for POlitical Science at Stanford and UCSD (where, if I really feel it's not the right fit, I could also switch to the IR/PS joint program). I'm currently considering applying to both Government and PEG at Harvard, but can't seem to open two application on the Harvard GSAS. Does anyone have any tips? I could probably submit one, and then do the other, but don't want to inconvenience my letter writers with that!

 

I applied to a dual program that required two applications with a second set of everything last year. I got in touch with the one program and they confirmed they could pull from the graduate school for my recs, GREs, transcripts. I'd suggest sending an e-mail to either the programs or the grad school and asking.