Help with strategies for choosing which schools to apply to

[Anonymona]

Hi all!

 

I'll be applying to PhD programs this winter for fall 2015 admit. I'm currently in the process of creating a short list of schools I'd like to attend.

 

I can't help but notice and be completely intimidated by how selective these programs are (or, at the very least, the schools that publish statistics are).

 

Apart from finding schools that were a good fit, how did you choose which schools to apply to? How did you leverage dream schools, back up schools, and schools somewhere in-between? How did you figure out which were which? How many programs did you (or do you wish you had) apply to? Do you have any other insight about how to choose which schools to apply to?

[marty3]

I don't know how different sociology is from engineering, in terms of strategies and such, but perhaps the best advice I have to offer is to talk to professors you know. Think of who you want to write your recommendation letters, and ask them about your (long) list. They will often go through the list with you, discussing the programs at different schools, often mentioning where they have "friends". Their recommendation letters will carry far more weight if a friend of theirs is reading it. When I was narrowing down my list of schools, this was actually a deciding factor in some cases, generally for my "reach" schools. Of course, if you know the school won't be a good match for you, don't apply for it despite this friend thing.

 

Professors might also add to your list of schools, especially if they know a very well-respected researcher at a lesser school. These kinds of schools are good candidates for your safety schools. Plus, if you don't get in anywhere else, you will still have a very good advisor, which is probably far more important than the school's name anyway.

 

If you're presenting at a conference in the near future, you could also try to introduce yourself to prospective advisors there. They'll remember you. Applying for summer programs at prospective grad schools can also help you make contact with a professor there.

 

Apply for external fellowships. The availability of these depends heavily on your field, but it's worth your time applying for them and stating it on your grad school applications.

 

If you have any red flags in your application (like a low gpa or something) try and find people who can write you really strong recommendation letters. I had some low grades in a few classes and got one of my letter writers to discuss how challenging these classes were (they were notoriously hard at my school) and that my grades didn't reflect my understanding of the material anyway. I never actually saw the letter, but he claimed to have written something like this.

 

Ultimately I applied to 8 schools, and got into 8. Again, this number may vary across fields but it was typical of my other science/engineering friends. Professors can probably give you a more typical number for your field.

[danieleWrites]

1. Start reading the journals. Read whatever is in your research interests and whatever is related to your research interests.

2. Make lists of people who are publishing things that you find exciting and useful for your research interests. Make the list long and somewhat sorted (really want to work with, want to work with, would be interesting to work with, don't want to work with unless there's no choice). Take notes on these people and what they've written, save these notes.

3. Locate the programs that employ these people as faculty.

4. Look through the programs (website, ASA publishes a book on graduate programs in the US, and so on) to see what they offer in terms of emphases, variety of faculty, funding, and so on. Take notes on these programs, save these notes. Use some form of calendar to track deadlines, costs, etc. so you know when you have to do whatever it is you have to do.

5. Pick the programs that fit you and start reading everything the faculty has published in the past two or so years. Read the dissertations graduate students have published in the the last couple of years. Use this data to weed out programs. Take notes on the faculty, save these notes.

6. Rank the programs in order of interest. Contact the professors you're interested in. Arrange to visit your top picks.

7. Forget the concept of safety school (no such thing exits; you are never, ever going to find a school that has so few applicants that you're practically guaranteed to get into it). Forget rankings. Forget tier.

8. Assess yourself: what research do you plan to pursue? What kinds of theoretical and methodological things do you need to accomplish this? what professors are you most interested in? What do you want to do with your degree? What options, other than academia, can you pursue with your degree ('cuz crosstraining is helpful!)? What are your deal-breakers? Are the locations that you can't live in? Do you need courses in other disciplines?

9. Use the notes you've taken on the programs and what you've read and on yourself to develop your application materials. Create a dossier of yourself for your reference letter writers to refer to. Generate SOPs for each program. Shore up your weaknesses (never got around to reading the symbolic interactionists? weak in statistics? need foreign language proficiency and it's been years since you took Spanish?).

That was my process. It's all about methodology.

Edited April 15, 2014 by danieleWrites

[Chris Bosh the Dinosaurman]

Please do not overlook ranking or overall perception of a program's quality.  The reputation of sociology graduate programs strongly effects your placement opportunities.  Unfortunately, sociology is a very prestige/reputation conscious field.  Those who graduate with PhDs from schools in the consesus top 10 or top 20 will have more job opportunities than those who attend lesser schools.  This is particularly important to today's academic job market.  

[Anonymona]

Thanks for your responses so far, very helpful.

 

I what I'm still confused about is leveraging "reach" (top 20 or top 30) schools and "safety" (still selective, obviously, but less prestigious and slightly less selective).

 

I'm thinking about applying to 5-6 schools with a decent fit in the top 20(ish), and then 2 schools outside of top ranked programs.

 

My rationale is that getting into top programs can be such a crapshoot that I want to optimize my chances there, but still have some options if they don't pan out. My other problem is that I'm not sure if I would actually attend my "back up" schools, so I'm not excited about spending the extra time/money applying to them (working with excellent faculty anywhere is great, but why commit to 5 more years of school if there are not jobs waiting?) But then again, the counter argument to that is what if I only apply to super selective programs and don't get in. So my logic just keeps going in circles.

 

So, more specifically, what do you think of my logic? How did you classify the schools applied to, and how did it work out for you? All feedback appreciated.

 

Side note: I don't love the the concept of "reach" and "safety" schools, nor do I love the elitism inherent in conversations about top tier schools, but I to think they're realities that I unfortunately have to navigate during the application process.

[Whatishistoryanyway]

From what I've been told, there are selective schools all across the rankings. Because there are competitive programs all over the rankings, it's hard to classify schools as reach, safety, etc. And to give a little perspective, a friend of mine got into Chicago a few years back, but was rejected from a school ranked in the 40s and one in the 60s. Not all programs will be good fit for your research interests, so those are somewhat easy to eliminate. Because of my research interests, there is only one top20 school I'm considering. The majority of the schools I'd feel comfortable at are in the 30-60 range. So be careful in narrowing down schools. I only applied to three schools this past cycle because I was still narrowing things down. Don't be scared to take your time because it's a big decision.

[hj2012]

Thanks for your responses so far, very helpful.

I what I'm still confused about is leveraging "reach" (top 20 or top 30) schools and "safety" (still selective, obviously, but less prestigious and slightly less selective).

I'm thinking about applying to 5-6 schools with a decent fit in the top 20(ish), and then 2 schools outside of top ranked programs.

My rationale is that getting into top programs can be such a crapshoot that I want to optimize my chances there, but still have some options if they don't pan out. My other problem is that I'm not sure if I would actually attend my "back up" schools, so I'm not excited about spending the extra time/money applying to them (working with excellent faculty anywhere is great, but why commit to 5 more years of school if there are not jobs waiting?) But then again, the counter argument to that is what if I only apply to super selective programs and don't get in. So my logic just keeps going in circles.

So, more specifically, what do you think of my logic? How did you classify the schools applied to, and how did it work out for you? All feedback appreciated.

Side note: I don't love the the concept of "reach" and "safety" schools, nor do I love the elitism inherent in conversations about top tier schools, but I to think they're realities that I unfortunately have to navigate during the application process.

I personally would not apply to schools that I wouldn't be excited about attending. What's the point of wasting the time and money for a school you ultimately would not attend? I ended to mostly top schools with a few others mixed in, but I would have been thrilled attending any of thethe ten schools I applied to. That said, I would be shocked if there weren't great schools for your interests outside of the top 20. If the only thing turning you off from a school is that's it's ranked, say, 23 in comparison to 19, then I might do some self evaluation about how much you're willing to compromise on prestige to achieve your goals. If the answer is that you reeeeally need to be at a top 20, that's totally fine! But I wouldn't waste my money applying to lower ranked schools.

Just my two cents!

[Chris Bosh the Dinosaurman]

Keep in mind that the rank isn't a hard rank like with med schools and law schools.  The historical perception of the program is more important than the current ranking because they produce better alumni networks.  Also, I think that it is easier to categorize schools into particular perception rankings than actually ranking them.  There are probably more than twenty schools that fit the description of "top" 20 program.  

 

As the last poster just said, don't apply to any programs you don't want to go to (or don't fit).  For example... if you want to be a demographer, don't go to Stanford.  If you want to do ethnographic research, don't go to Penn State.  

 

Also, try to see how you fit into the quantitive/qualitative/mixed methods focus of the department.  Most departments will have some options/flexibility... however, in order to get the best experience you probably want to fit the department research methods training focus.  Here are a few that I know.

 

Quantitative: UNC, Penn State (almost purely quantitative), Washington

 

Qualitative: Northwestern (I don't know much about this side)

[mightymaus]

1. Start reading the journals. Read whatever is in your research interests and whatever is related to your research interests.

2. Make lists of people who are publishing things that you find exciting and useful for your research interests. Make the list long and somewhat sorted (really want to work with, want to work with, would be interesting to work with, don't want to work with unless there's no choice). Take notes on these people and what they've written, save these notes.

3. Locate the programs that employ these people as faculty.

4. Look through the programs (website, ASA publishes a book on graduate programs in the US, and so on) to see what they offer in terms of emphases, variety of faculty, funding, and so on. Take notes on these programs, save these notes. Use some form of calendar to track deadlines, costs, etc. so you know when you have to do whatever it is you have to do.

5. Pick the programs that fit you and start reading everything the faculty has published in the past two or so years. Read the dissertations graduate students have published in the the last couple of years. Use this data to weed out programs. Take notes on the faculty, save these notes.

6. Rank the programs in order of interest. Contact the professors you're interested in. Arrange to visit your top picks.

7. Forget the concept of safety school (no such thing exits; you are never, ever going to find a school that has so few applicants that you're practically guaranteed to get into it). Forget rankings. Forget tier.

8. Assess yourself: what research do you plan to pursue? What kinds of theoretical and methodological things do you need to accomplish this? what professors are you most interested in? What do you want to do with your degree? What options, other than academia, can you pursue with your degree ('cuz crosstraining is helpful!)? What are your deal-breakers? Are the locations that you can't live in? Do you need courses in other disciplines?

9. Use the notes you've taken on the programs and what you've read and on yourself to develop your application materials. Create a dossier of yourself for your reference letter writers to refer to. Generate SOPs for each program. Shore up your weaknesses (never got around to reading the symbolic interactionists? weak in statistics? need foreign language proficiency and it's been years since you took Spanish?).

That was my process. It's all about methodology.

I completely agree with this, exceeeeept, I didn't visit any of my programs until my admission status was known. Once you're admitted, most schools will pay for your travel costs to visit. Plus, it's a strain on faculty to dedicate their time to arrange your visit if you might not even apply, let alone be accepted into the program. Much better for you and the faculty to wait til you get that acceptance.

 

I also wanted to stress to make sure the professors you're interested in aren't retiring anytime soon.

 

#1 thing is the fit -- are your interests a good match for the program? Are there faculty outside of the department that are also good fits for your interests that could be on your dissertation committee? Will your research be supported there? Are there strong fits for mentors who have the time to dedicate to you?

 

Good luck!

[pinwheelb00kshelf]

Thanks for your responses so far, very helpful.

 

I what I'm still confused about is leveraging "reach" (top 20 or top 30) schools and "safety" (still selective, obviously, but less prestigious and slightly less selective).

 

I'm thinking about applying to 5-6 schools with a decent fit in the top 20(ish), and then 2 schools outside of top ranked programs.

 

My rationale is that getting into top programs can be such a crapshoot that I want to optimize my chances there, but still have some options if they don't pan out. My other problem is that I'm not sure if I would actually attend my "back up" schools, so I'm not excited about spending the extra time/money applying to them (working with excellent faculty anywhere is great, but why commit to 5 more years of school if there are not jobs waiting?) But then again, the counter argument to that is what if I only apply to super selective programs and don't get in. So my logic just keeps going in circles.

 

So, more specifically, what do you think of my logic? How did you classify the schools applied to, and how did it work out for you? All feedback appreciated.

 

Side note: I don't love the the concept of "reach" and "safety" schools, nor do I love the elitism inherent in conversations about top tier schools, but I to think they're realities that I unfortunately have to navigate during the application process.

 

In my opinion, there is no such thing as a "safety" in PhD admissions. I (perhaps foolishly) applied to fifteen programs, and my rejections, wait lists, and acceptances had absolutely no relationship to their respective program rankings. I don't regret applying to so many programs, because as you say, the process is a crapshoot. However, I did get accepted to the programs I was most excited/intrigued about (not necessarily the highest ranked), which is telling.