Not applying this cycle... but someday!

[Poli92]

I'm just curious to get a feel for who else out there isn't applying this cycle (for whatever reason) and what you're doing to prepare for when you eventually plan to apply (I'm assuming in the next couple years). 

 

Or, for those of you that are applying or already attending, what is your biggest 20/20 hindsight reflection on the years before you applied? Things you regret? Should've done more of? Should've done less of? 

 

This might be a big help to those of us for whom applications are still over the horizon! 

 

Also, things are getting much quieter around here now that most applications are sent out and I'm finding it hard to procrastinate...  

[TheGnome]

This will sound boring, unoriginal, and cliche (trite, hackneyed, banal, stale, I know) but the best thing you can do is to really improve every part of the application to the extent that you can. The individual answers will differ - some will say SOP, others GRE, some will say take stats classes, others will emphasize a solid writing sample or contacting POIs. Truly though, there is no other person apart from yourself who knows the boundaries of your limits, what you can do, and what sort of opportunities you can use to get ahead in the competition. Take a look at your file and think, for every single component of the package, and ask yourself - what can I do to make this better? You will see that you already have a lot of answers. Start doing them as soon as possible.

 

My biggest advice? Do not be lazy, do not procrastinate, be proactive. 

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

I didn't put any effort into the GRE, which hurt me in the Quant. And then I never found the money to take it again. That said, take it sooner than later so that you have time to retake it if you need to. Keep in mind that it costs a lot.

 

I'm on round 2. I had okay successes last year. I learned from the school that accepted me without funding that it was my GRE that made me less competitive for funding. That said, there were other things that could have been better. Namely, my SOP (here's where you have incredible control, and that's why it's often emphasized). I organized it last year like so (5 paragraphs, let's split that into easy 20% segments):

 

Par 1: Why I'm interested in what I'm interested in (without emphasizing what I'm interested in)

Par 2: Past research

Par 3: Research interests (but not entirely clear)

Par 4: Profs at school (and generic sucking up)

Par 5: Other resources at school and generic conclusion

 

Or:

 

40% past

40% generic sucking up

20% research interests (but more like 15% because it's rather fuzzy)

 

Now, it wasn't awful, but there's certainly a lot of room for improvement there. For one, it took me to the third paragraph to get to my grad school intentions. When I finally did, I didn't do so clearly, demonstrating that I had a clear idea of research or methods. Also, "fit" cannot be demonstrated only by the "fit paragraph". This time around, I've limited that paragraph to - say - 20%, but I'm expecting the rest of my statement to demonstrate fit without explicitly pointing it out. This time I took a decidedly different route:

 

Par 1: Research interests/academic goals

Par 2: Significant past research

Par 3: Current research and related academic activities

Par 4: Significant past academic activities (conferences, TA jobs, etc.)

Par 5: Fit, clearly identifying substance, theory and methods vis-a-vis the faculty

 

So suddenly, it's become more like 50% research interests and research experience, 30% academic experience, and 20% fit. Everyone will take a different approach to the SOP, but I'm confident I've presented myself in a much more positive light this time. 

 

Not a lot changed otherwise (besides pretty extensive research and a fellowship abroad), but I did bring another LOR on board (I only had one political scientist last time). I realized that although my two LORs from the humanities know me extremely well and although I have a great relationship with them, they can speak only to a certain extent to my abilities as a political scientist. Where I could have four recommendations this year, I had four. And where I could have three, I had two political scientists and an adviser from the humanities (who has supervised research projects, my time abroad and my language acquisition). 

 

TheGnome is right on that you have to focus on every part of your application, especially knowing that every school will emphasize different parts more than others. For some, GRE/GPA might be very important (though I'd imagine this becomes pretty redundant when you've got 100 4.0s), for others the SOP, and still others the LORs. Make sure they're all as refined/positive as possible (within your power, of course).

 

Only time will tell if my changes make a difference, but I'm hopeful! Good luck!

Edited December 13, 2013 by TakeMyCoffeeBlack

[Poli92]

Thank you both for your feedback! I appreciate the guidance that you two in particular, but this entire forum as well, provide. I attend a school where most poli sci students who choose to continue with their education opt towards either law or professional master's programs rather than going a more academic route. As a consequence, the advice that I often receive from faculty is to seek help from those in other programs, so this has been an extremely useful resource to me, as I am sure it has been to many others. 

 

Keep being awesome and good luck!!