Welcome to the 2015-2016 Cycle!

[Determinedandnervous]

I think the quote's catching on among other applicants.  Congrats to the Michigan State admit! 

[terefere]

53 minutes ago, Determinedandnervous said:

Congrats, by the way! Rochester's a really good school.

Thanks! I'm really happy to have my first admission.

[s1994]

It's pretty late of a day for Rochester to release results lol. Congrats to the people who get admitted! 

[Determinedandnervous]

I wouldn't be surprised if there was another batch tomorrow - terefere is the only one to report, and I'm sure if anyone else got a decision they would certainly post it on the results page.

[cgfren08]

1 hour ago, privatehayek said:

 

Could it be another fan of the Austrian School? 

Edited February 2, 2016 by cgfren08

[s1994]

18 minutes ago, Determinedandnervous said:

I wouldn't be surprised if there was another batch tomorrow - terefere is the only one to report, and I'm sure if anyone else got a decision they would certainly post it on the results page.

Hopefully Duke and Berkeley will release their results tomorrow! I have talked to people at Michigan -- Even though the information on their website is accurate, Michigan is probably not going to release the decisions until the end of this week. 

[Determinedandnervous]

Just now, shane94 said:

Hopefully Duke and Berkeley will release their results tomorrow! I have talked to people at Michigan -- Even though the information on their website is accurate, Michigan is probably not going to release the decisions until the end of this week. 

Good to know!

[terefere]

35 minutes ago, Determinedandnervous said:

I wouldn't be surprised if there was another batch tomorrow - terefere is the only one to report, and I'm sure if anyone else got a decision they would certainly post it on the results page.

I haven't posted my acceptance on the results page yet. It must be another admitted person.

[elw]

To whittle away the time, here's something I'm curious about — how did folks pick schools to apply to, rank-/competitiveness-wise? I was advised to have 2-3 reach options, 4-5 good fits, and another 1-2 "safe" choices. Because of extenuating circumstances (attempting to co-locate with my significant other), I ended up with 11 applications, spread between NRC R rankings of 7-20 (high-low, OSU) and 38-70 (Syracuse). In hindsight, I may have more closely evaluated some higher-tier programs. But hindsight, 20/20 vision, and all that jazz...

[Hopeful57]

@elwright I focused really heavy on faculty research interests. I spent a lot of undergrad doing research that I plan on 'generally' pursuing for my PhD so I really honed in on those top 15 schools that had departments with a strong faculty in my area. I also didn't apply certain places I would hate living in (*cough* New Haven *cough*)

[elw]

Daww, New Haven isn't terrible... 

[Khaari]

Just now, elwright said:

Daww, New Haven isn't terrible... 

I picked the top 10 schools that place students well in jobs after, then omitted a few that wouldn't be strong for what I'm interested in (for e.g., Ohio State and MIT are very security-focused, and I don't study IR / security), and then added 2 back up options (slightly lower ranked, but still top 15 or so)

[elw]

What rankings are people referring to, however?

[midweststudent]

3 minutes ago, elwright said:

What rankings are people referring to, however?

USNWR

I looked at combining 1) Faculty doing work in the areas I'm interested in, and 2) generally better-ranked places that have a good placement history. 

[s1994]

30 minutes ago, elwright said:

What rankings are people referring to, however?

US News is definitely the most popular one, although the ranking can be outdated sometimes, and it does not necessarily reflect the placement because much weight is put on faculty research, prestige, etc., instead of on student placement (i.e. two of the top 10s have not been placing well in the past 3-5 years). Thus, a healthy mix of US News ranking (and the Chronicle one as well) + placement history should be a good starting point to determine the initial list to apply to. And the list should be subject to additions and removals of departments based on your research interest matching with the faculty. 

Edited February 2, 2016 by shane94

[elw]

Not to start a debate, but just to note — the U.S. News ranking is solely a survey of academics at peer institutions, so there's no weight per se on placement or research.

[s1994]

11 minutes ago, elwright said:

Not to start a debate, but just to note — the U.S. News ranking is solely a survey of academics at peer institutions, so there's no weight per se on placement or research.

Why would peers rank a program highly if none of the faculty publishes on APSR or JOP? Although research or placement are not explicitly weighed in the ranking, they are implicitly mingled in people's judgement. Prestige matters, but we also see prestigious schools with a relatively low-ranked PSC department (i.e. Penn). The ranking can be biased for sure, but serving as a starting point for students to pick schools, US News is for sure doing fine. 

There is no weight put on placement; that is why I said a healthy mix of ranking + placement history can be a good starting point.

Edited February 2, 2016 by shane94

[IndEnth]

I worked my way through the US News ranking, scanning only places I could at least remotely see myself living in for the next 6 years for faculty with a match in research interests (I'm a non-US citizen and out of school for years, so had to research all of that from scratch), and then found a mix of top-10 schools to reach for, solid 20 to 40 schools that would be a good fit, and a couple 40 to 60 schools as backup. I'm pretty sure though that I haven't only sent out more applications than most other people here but also included much lower-ranked school than the majority. It so happens that I'm interested in a niche, and having someone who focuses on my region at a lower-ranked school might still work better for me than trying at a higher-ranked school where there is no one in my area. Also, I really want to start this year, and considering that I'm currently working in a different field and not getting any younger, I figured I rather give it a shot at a rank-50 university than not doing it at all.

I guess how high you shoot/how much you spread depends on

• how good your profile is (or at least how convinced you are of the high quality of your profile),
• your risk aversion and
• what goal you follow in obtaining a PhD (i.e., teaching at a teaching-heavy college vs. research at a think tank vs. faculty position at a TT university, etc)

[s1994]

13 minutes ago, IndEnth said:

... scanning only places I could at least remotely see myself living in for the next 6 years ...

My biggest debate with myself when applying to Michigan is that "Ann Arbor is so cold..." lol! 

[ultraultra]

I made my initial list through a combination of browsing these forums/PSR for threads on my research interests, asking faculty, and looking up scholars I liked. I shortened the list by going through department websites and writing down names of POIs and then repeatedly showing my list to faculty, asking for cuts/keeps. Like others I also cut one or two schools on the basis that I couldn't handle living there for five years (particularly UCLA, though the LaCour thing played a role too in that case).

In the months before submitting I had a sense that I should try to intentionally include a breadth of rankings, but I was also conscious that I'd rather strengthen my application and re-apply than go to a school with questionable placement potential. Plus, my advisors all encouraged me to aim high and said that I would have a good shot at top schools. In the end I ended up with 11 schools, the top tier of which includes some CHYMPS where I have reasonably good fit, the lowest of which rank in the 30-40 range (though all would likely rank higher in my subfield if those data were available). 

Retrospectively, there are some schools I should have applied to but was never cognizant of, and I threw an application in at one T10 place where my fit is actually quite poor, which I realized too late and regret. But so far I've only gotten good news/reviews and have two acceptances which I feel good about. So in the spirit of Downs I think I somehow found an optimal trade-off between information cost and payoffs ;). 

Edited February 2, 2016 by ultraultra

[puddle]

3 hours ago, elwright said:

Daww, New Haven isn't terrible... 

It's actually a pretty perfect place for grad school... I wouldn't stay here long term but not many things beat a night of 8$ theatre, New Haven Pizza, and disturbingly cheap GPSCY beer.

[GradSchoolTruther]

LaCour scandal would have 0.0001% effect on a prospie, FWIW.

Edited February 2, 2016 by GradSchoolTruther

[Ignat]

Anyone else here still waiting for Wisconsin-Madison? It seems that they released they acceptances and rejects already...

[southerngent]

Just a friendly note to say "be careful" about referencing the USNWR rankings too exactly. I think that practice is fine at the top end -- I would still say that the top 10-15 schools are roughly the same ones -- but these rankings are both a bit outdated and (as someone has said) aren't based on any kind of metrics beyond peer review, per se. Not that they shouldn't be trusted, but they are not perfect measures of what you all are interested in.

My advice -- (ok, so this might be a moot point at this stage, but...) If anyone is interested in a school that is "lower" on USNWR than they'd like (whether it be 25th, 50th or 75th), you should also take time to cross reference with other rankings lists. I would specifically suggest NRC for political science and ARWU for social sciences, as these will better proxy for placement, faculty track record and (in the case of ARWU) both intellectual and programmatic resources.

If you do this, you'll notice that some institutions noticeably drop down the lists (Georgetown, UVa, etc.) while other schools more broadly outperform USNWR in things like placement and overall programmatic experience (Syracuse, USC, GMU and even places like LSU or Mizzou). This is not an endorsement or critique of any of these programs, but rather a reminder that the full picture is out there beyond USNWR.

[CarefreeWritingsontheWall]

On the topic of choosing programs, I opted for 8. I'm Canadian, but I went for programs only it the US after advice from a number of faculty, and in sitting on hiring committees this past Fall. Having American training from a top program really helps you in the job search process at top Canadian institutions which is a plus - I'd like to have the option open to come back and teach at a Canadian institution when or if I finish.

Overall I would say that my choices were most significantly influenced by prospective fit and the epistemological/ontological/methodological orientation of programs. I currently work with someone who is very quant focused, which has added to my work and challenged me in many ways, but I know I wanted a program that would allow me to take on a mixed methods approach with interdisciplinary elements (borrowing from economics and history) without pushing back on me for it all the time (my current situation).

Knowing this, reputation and location were also important, as well as the department's ability to support and fund advanced training in methods in house as I've had to go outside my current institution already and pay out of pocket for supplemental training they didn't offer. I wasn't that focused on USNews rankings to be honest (maybe I should have been?), but of the 8 I applied to, 4 are top 10, and 4 are 10-25 in rank. I would only consider one of my options a 'safety' as it was a last minute app, but I'm genuinely interested in going there and would take an offer seriously. An added benefit to these locations was the networking potential, and ties of my current mentors to these programs (as alma maters, where they did their post-docs). I've indirectly done RA work for a number of the people I applied to work with, as they're co-authors on a number of papers with my current supervisor. Knowing more about the projects they were working on was all the more motivation to try and work with them directly.

I'd say my considerations aren't entirely typical. I haven't heard of many people saying that ontological concerns popped up when it came to program choice, nor network connections really driving potential apps - but for me it's mattered a lot in my current work/who I'm working with, and the disagreements that can arise from differences of opinion on the topic are something I'm eager to avoid in the future. This largely comes from the nature of my current MA program though. I know that no matter where I end up I'll be making the most of what the program has to offer.