Profiles and Results, SOPs, and Advice (Fall 2016)

[ultraultra]

Since a lot of people seem to be waiting on their last school and may disappear after those decisions drop, I thought it might be a good time to post the annual results thread! I found the previous threads extremely useful while putting my apps together and setting my expectations, and have poured over them dozens of times. So if your cycle is over, please consider posting your profile and results (with as much detail as you feel comfortable sharing), to help future applicants going into this messy and stressful process!

 

The previous threads are here: 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, and 2010

 

The template, from previous years, is as follows:

 

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:
Major(s)/Minor(s):
Undergrad GPA:
Type of Grad:
Grad GPA:
GRE:
Any Special Courses:
Letters of Recommendation:
Research Experience:
Teaching Experience:
Subfield/Research Interests:
Other:

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$):
Waitlists:
Rejections:
Pending:
Going to:

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

 

 

SOP:

 

 

 

[elw]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Liberal arts college
Major(s)/Minor(s): Double-major Writing & Politics '07
Undergrad GPA: 3.04
Type of Grad: Master's Political Science '16
Grad GPA: 3.93
GRE: V167/Q155/AW4.5, V163/Q161/AW5.5
Any Special Courses: Scopes & Methods, Stat Methods in Research, Applied Longitudinal Stats
Letters of Recommendation: Three from faculty in the master's program, two of whom I've worked rather close with, includes the DGS and department chair.
Research Experience: Standard summative research projects for graduate courses; independent project involving an experimental survey of undergrads.
Teaching Experience: Teaching assistant for intro IR and American courses.
Subfield/Research Interests: American/behavior/psychology
Other: Professional experience writing and journalism in the interim between undergrad and graduate level.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Six funded offers, three with additional fellowship money (from several hundred to $8k annually).
Waitlists: 0
Rejections: 4
Pending: 1
Going to: Staying in the Northeast or heading to the Midwest

LESSONS LEARNED:
Fit fit fit. Brevity in the statement of purpose, levity while you wait for decisions. Pay more attention to real-life advisors and less to online forum posters.

[Determinedandnervous]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Public LAC
Major(s)/Minor(s): Double-major Political Science and History
Undergrad GPA: translates to 3.9/4
Type of Grad: N/A
Grad GPA: N/A
GRE: V170/Q161/AW5.0
Any Special Courses: Research Methods in Political Science, Research Methods in History, Econometrics
Letters of Recommendation: Two from senior members of the Political Science Department, one Assistant Professor in History Department (1 from PS and 2 from HIS in a handful of places)
Research Experience: Senior thesis, currently working on 1 working paper, revising another
Teaching Experience: None
Subfield/Research Interests: Comparative/American/institutions
Other: Applied political experience in undergrad, internship in Canadian Parliament.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Six funded offers (1 top 20, 3 top 30, 2 mid-rank), 1 unfunded master's
Waitlists: 0
Rejections: 5 (3 top 10, 2 top 20)
Pending: 3
Going to: Don't know yet

LESSONS LEARNED:
Fit matters a lot, so read up as much as possible to find which people are the best to work with. At the same time, it doesn't have to be a perfect fit, though that has helped me. The adComs work in a low-signal, high-noise environment, so send as many positive signals as possible in your file to make it less ambiguous. Also, make contingency plans for if you're not admitted - I made them and was less anxious because of it, though I ended up not needing them.

SOP:
I don't feel comfortable posting it publicly, so PM me for it.

[doubledyno]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Public university
Major(s)/Minor(s): Double-major in political science and Russian studies, minor in German
Undergrad GPA: 4.0/4.0
Type of Grad: None
Grad GPA: N/A
GRE: V166/Q155/AW5.5
Any Special Courses: MA level courses on Russia-EU relations at University of Tartu in Estonia, research methods, economics, and classes specializing on contentious politics, Latin American politics, and African politics
Letters of Recommendation: Two from tenured professors in the political science department, one the head of department, and one from head of Russian studies department.
Research Experience: Wrote a senior honor's thesis, RA for project with head of department focusing on Moldova, a few conference presentations.
Teaching Experience: None in academia, but I teach outdoor skills at the university's outdoor center.
Subfield/Research Interests: Post-Soviet space, contentious politics, political economy.
Other: Significant language and study abroad experience. 10 months in Russia on a US State Department grant when I was 16, 6 months in Estonia. Fluent in Russian, intermediate proficiency in German, basic proficiency in Estonian (useless language but I thought it was a cool point to have on my CV).

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): 2 funded offers, one full one partial (1 top 10, top 20 depending on what ranking you look at, the partial at a mid-rank)
Waitlists: 0
Rejections: 7 - all top 10.
Pending: 1
Going to: Most likely UNC-CH, unless I get into Harvard haha.

LESSONS LEARNED:
A better GRE score probably would've helped me out, but I got into one of my top choice programs regardless (the fit is almost perfect!). I heard from POI that my SOP was really what got them interested in me, and I worked on that for about 6 months and had 5 different professors give me feedback on it. Definitely workshop your SOP as much as you can, I know I ended up with a much better end product because of the huge amount of attention I gave it! Fit was also important here. Unfortunately there's been a real neglect of post-Soviet Eurasia area studies in the US lately, so most programs aren't very keen on students who want to specialize in it. I exclusively applied to schools with access to FLAS grants and large Eurasia/Eastern Europe interdisciplinary centers. 

SOP:

PM me if you'd like to read it.

 

[ultraultra]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 3 Canadian university
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science
Undergrad GPA: Between 3.82 and 3.92 depending on how you calculate it.
Type of Grad: Top 3 Canadian university (Political Science MA)
Grad GPA: None at time of application.
GRE: 168V 158Q 5.5AW
Any Special Courses:  

During undergrad: grad seminar in political psych, summer school on experimental methods. 

During MA: 2 PhD-level statistics courses, 2 independent studies on topics relevant to my substantive interests.
Letters of Recommendation: Apparently all very strong, from political scientists who know me well and work in fields relevant to my research interests.  Sent all four when possible, otherwise alternated #3 and #4 depending on who had better connections to the school.

1. Famous/respected senior scholar who co-supervised my Honours thesis. 

2. Rising star junior scholar who I am RAing for and co-authoring with during my MA. 

3. Untenured AP who co-supervised my Honours thesis and taught a seminar I took.

4. Tenured professor who I RAed for during undergrad and am currently co-authoring with. 

Research Experience: 

- Honours thesis (experiments, top grade in the thesis program)

- Several consecutive RAships spanning ~3 years

- 3 quantitative working papers with various faculty

- Research grant to conduct a survey at my undergrad institution

- Two undergrad publications
Teaching Experience: None
Subfield/Research Interests: Political psychology, political communication, experimental methods.
Other: former Editor-in-Chief of undergraduate journal, prestigious MA fellowship.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Harvard ($$), Michigan ($$), UCSD($$), NYU ($$), Northwestern ($$), Stony Brook ($), UPenn (*), Vanderbilt (*).
Waitlists: None
Rejections: Berkeley, Stanford, Princeton.
Pending: None
Going to: Will decide after visits.

 * Declined before they sent funding info

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

 

Many, have spent a long time thinking about this. 

 

While putting together your file:

 

-  Be strategic about your reference letters, if possible. If you have multiple people willing to recommend you, try to think about how they each bring something different to your file as well as have credibility with different groups you hope to reach.

 

- Not everyone will agree with me here but: de-politicize your file. I’m someone who has done a lot of activism and electoral politics in the recent past. I made a point to focus on my academic achievements in my file, and to try and make my google results more professional (to limited success). Why? Because (I’ve heard) ad comms are very wary of people pursuing graduate studies as a way to change the world who don’t understand what academia is like + because it's impossible to know who is on the committee and what they value/believe politically + because there’s already limited space in the application. 

 

- Do an MA. Whether this is a feasible option of course depends on where you are. In Canada, there are lots of well-respected & fully-funded MA programs, and I received a scholarship/RAship, which meant it wasn’t a sunk cost. Not only did my MA make me more competitive for PhD programs (by giving me way more research experience and methodological expertise) but it also was a great experience to spend a year working with new mentors. I wouldn’t have wanted to do my PhD at this school for myriad reasons, but I am very grateful to have had the chance to spend a year here to diversify my academic experiences, strengthen my application profile, and become that much more sure that I wanted to be an academic.

 

- Anticipate your weaknesses and try to counteract them. I knew that my methods background would be thin for a lot of top schools so, as much as possible, I spent the last 8 months before applications building up my stats chops. I think this helped in general, and I think it helped counteract my GRE Q. In addition - get your references to speak to your weaknesses in their letters. And, if your school doesn’t have an endemic of grade inflation, get them to mention that as well. N of 1, but I think this helped.

 

- If you have time, submit the January applications when you submit the December ones. This allows you to enjoy your winter holidays in peace instead of scampering last minute to remember how to do things. 

 

- Letters often do not come in on time. Don’t panic if your reviewers are a few days late, though of course send a gently-worded reminder.

 

- Start preparing early for both the GRE and the essays. The GRE sucks. Studying for the GRE sucks. If you do a little bit of studying every week over a long period of time, and take it early enough to allow a real take, you’ll save yourself so much anxiety. As for the SOP: it’s been said on previous versions of this thread but your first SOP will be total garbage. Start it (at least) the summer before graduating, and revisit every 2-4 weeks. Ask your letter writers to review it, and PhD students you trust. And - a mistake I made - don’t forget that it’s not just one long SOP. Some schools want a short one (~500 words). And some schools want a SOP that’s about research + a separate Personal Statement that’s about your personal journey. While I wouldn’t recommend sending out all 3 documents for frequent edits, you should draft all these separate documents early. 

 

While waiting for decisions:

 

- Personally, I don’t think its a good idea to cold-email POIs before getting a decision from the department. Every professor I talked to said they get hundreds of these e-mails and view them as a nuisance more than anything. There’s a good chance your POI isn’t even on the committee, and it’s unlikely that a professor will be willing to go to bat for you with the ad comm after just a few e-mails. If your letter writers know your POI, get them to e-introduce you or to just mention you to the POI (even so, this may have no effect besides making you feel more in control of your destiny). Otherwise, hold tight. 

 

- Limit your access to this site. I’m serious. This website is extremely useful during the pre-application process, as you put together your package. And while decisions are rolling out, it can be nice to commiserate with other applicants. However, so much of the information on these forums (and on the results page!) is simultaneously stressful and useless. Limiting your access to this site is the difference between getting an e-mail notification about your rejection (quick like a band-aid) versus agonizing for hours or days or even weeks over whether/when the rejection will come and if maybe, just maybe, you’re on a waitlist they didn’t tell you about yet. If I could do it all again, I would just look at these pages for tips while putting my application together, jot down rough timelines to hear decisions, and then never log in again. (Psst: https://selfcontrolapp.com/)

 

- When you inevitably ignore the above: try not to pay too much attention to when other people get their results. Sometimes other peoples’ results are a clue that bad (or good) news is coming. Sometimes they mean nothing at all. I was convinced I was rejected by Vanderbilt for several weeks, when it turned out they just didn’t feel the need to interview me. I got an interview by Stony Brook several weeks earlier than most people, but all of us got accepted at the same time. At my MA institution, I heard back 2 weeks later than the first round of admits because they were finalizing my scholarship. No news is not bad news - it’s no news. 

 

- Try to remember how idiosyncratic this process is. We have a tendency to assume everything is planned and down to an exact science. It’s not. Based on this site, I was worried my GRE scores would bar me from admission at CHYMPS, and then basically every professor I talked to said it depended who was on the committee. Similarly, some folks on this forum tried to predict the exact date admissions decisions would be released based on previous years. Realistically, the committees release decisions when they make them, and when they make them is based mostly on when they’re able to actually meet. Lower-ranked schools have an incentive to release early as to convince you early, whereas highly-ranked schools know they’ll fill their quotas no matter what so they can release whenever. Attempting to calculate the exact date of offers or the exact GRE scores you need to get in - these are futile exercises. All you can do is improve your file to the best of your ability and hope it works out.

 

 

SOP: Not comfortable sharing it but the structure was as so: opened with a vignette about becoming interested in political psych —>  discussed my general research interests —> discussed a specific set of questions I’d be interested in answering in my dissertation —> hinted at methodology I’d hope to use —> discussed my research experience and credentials chronologically —> discussed what drew me to the specific school including POIs, institutes/centres, and annual events —> ended with a line about intending to pursue an R1 TT position post-grad.

 

Good luck!

[PizzaCat93]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Southern LAC
Major(s)/Minor(s): major - political science; minor - Middle East studies
Undergrad GPA: 3.8
Type of Grad: none
Grad GPA: n/a
GRE: V166/Q159/AW5
Any Special Courses: Political Analysis (quant methods)
Letters of Recommendation: One from research mentor (PS assistant prof); one from academic advisor and methods prof (PS associate prof); one from chair of minor (religion associate prof)
Research Experience: Summer research assistantship, undergraduate thesis
Teaching Experience: Teaching assistant for upper level PS course
Subfield/Research Interests: comparative politics, specifically parties (extremist and right-wing) and religion/secularism and politics
Other: Two peer-reviewed publications, one solo-authored, one co-authored with research mentor; award for best undergraduate paper at state's annual PS conference; 5 conference presentations; graduated in 3.5 years 

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Ohio State ($$), Northwestern ($$), Georgetown ($$), George Washington ($$), Colorado-Boulder ($$)
Waitlists: UNC-Chapel Hill
Rejections: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Michigan, Stanford
Going to: Most likely Northwestern

LESSONS LEARNED: I think my unimpressive GRE quant score, coupled with my poor/nonexistent math background was what kept me out of the top programs, especially considering I am fresh out of undergrad. It was a stressful and largely stochastic process, but I'm fairly satisfied with the outcome. 

[kronos16]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Large Southern State Uni (R1)
Major(s)/Minor(s):  Political Science w/ double minor Security and History
Undergrad GPA: 2.7
Type of Grad: Large Southern State Uni (R1)MA Political Science (Major: Methods, Minor: IR)
Grad GPA: 3.3
GRE: 156v/155/q
Any Special Courses: Heavy methods (game theory, time series, MLE, Causal/Inference, ect) 
Letters of Recommendation: 1 IR (Very well known), 1 Method (multiple classes taken), 1 Mentor (known for 4+ years). Strong letters
Research Experience: 1 national conference presentation, 1 paper currently under R&R for a subfield journal
Teaching Experience: No class room, but tutoring at learning center on campus
Subfield/Research Interests: Conflict and Security, methods minor
Other: Several workshops (IR and Methods) and several internships (campaigns at the city/state/national level) and nonprofit/think tank work

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Kentucky($), Ole Miss(pending)
Waitlists: 
Rejections: ASU, Kansas State(security)
Pending: Texas Tech, Alabama
Going to: Good question

 

LESSONS LEARNED: Grades arent everything, a well thought out research plan can make up for less than stellar GPA. Be realistic with where you apply, fit is just as important as prestige. Contact the department and potential advisors before applying, this gets you on their radar and will help when the admissions committee meets. Build relationships at every chance you get, a professional network will be a huge benefit down the line. Also highly recommend using a quantitative writing sample for your submission. Showing that you have the ability to properly use basic/advanced methods shows that the methods sequence will not be an issue for you. This gives the committee confidences that you will be able to handle what they throw at you.

 

 

SOP: This is crucial. Your SOP can make or break your app. Emphasize how you and your research agenda will fit into the department, as well as how it fits with the professors you are interested to work with.  Show that you add value to the department, and show how you can progress towards your goals with the help of the department. 

 

 

NOTE: MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING YOUR SELF INTO WHEN YOU DECIDE TO GO FOR A PHD.

 You will spend 4-6 years doing this. I didnt know what I was getting into when I went for my masters. If you are not a math/stats kind of person I would recommend a different path.  

[cgfren08]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:    Selective Northeastern LAC
Major(s)/Minor(s):        Economics/Government
Undergrad GPA:    3.4
Type of Grad:  Regional University- Education Masters
Grad GPA:  3.93
GRE: V 161, Q 170, AW 4.5
Any Special Courses: 
Letters of Recommendation: My Two Undergraduate Advisors, (Econ, Poly Sci) and my Graduate Advisor (Secondary Education)
Research Experience: One Conference Presentation for Masters Thesis
Teaching Experience: 1 year Economics TA, 2 years of teaching AP courses at a boarding school. 
Subfield/Research Interests: Comparative


RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Syracuse ($$) Oregon ($$) Albany, Buffalo, Uconn ($$)
Waitlists: 
Rejections: Ohio State, Brown, Brandeis
Pending:CU Boulder
Going to: ???

 

LESSONS LEARNED: Funding situations for lower ranked schools seem to be pretty poor. I'd like to think my work experience, GRE and grad school GPA helped to offset my undergraduate GPA in an applicant field where most student apply with a 3.7 or higher. If I was to go back, I'd take more cracks at top 30 schools and apply to a few less safety schools, since many were unable to afford funding. That said, I'm pretty satisfied with where I expect to end up.

[joseon4th]

Type of Undergrad Institution: Private Research University
 

Major(s)/Minor(s): History
 

Undergrad GPA: 3.9
 

Type of Grad: International Affairs Policy Program
 

Grad GPA: 3.6
 

GRE: 165V, 156Q, 5.0AW
 

Research Experience: Limited to thesis & coursework for undergrad and grad programs
 

Teaching Experience: TA during undergrad; 2 years public school teaching 
 

Subfield/Research Interests: International Relations - Security
 

Other: Extensive travel experience and relevant professional experience

RESULTS:
 

Acceptances($$ or no $$): UCLA ($$), UC Davis ($$), UW-Seattle ($$)
 

Waitlists: None
 

Rejections: UC Berkeley, UCSD, Ohio State, U of Chicago, Northwestern
 

Pending: None
 

Going to: UCLA

 

LESSONS LEARNED: 

 

1. Going from a policy program to an academic PhD program is clearly not the norm; almost all prospective students I met at visitation weekends were coming either straight from undergrad or academic master's programs, or a profession. As became clear, being "not the norm" was generally not to my benefit. A faculty member from one of my non-admitted programs informed me that my background, SOP, and interview (I had a Skype interview) were all excellent, but other applicants with similar interests who had published/presented papers were perceived as less of a "risk" to admit.

 

 

2. Regarding the GRE: hated taking it and took it twice, with marginal improvement and a non-competitive Q score. However my scores got me into (or rather, did not impede my admittance to) my policy master's program, and it got me into UCLA, Davis, and UW, and it didn't preclude interviews with other top programs. This does not mean that a high Q score is unimportant, but it does mean you can choose what to focus on, and still get into a top-10 program. I chose to spend my limited resources on crafting the best SOP, writing sample, and resume (as in, time pursuing value-added internships) I could, rather than test prep. 

 

3. Regarding the SOP: start early, edit often, re-write even more often, and get feedback from diverse sources. Rinse and repeat. I spent ~8 months working on mine, on and off, and had been thinking about it before then. Starting early gives you the luxury to work on it when you're "inspired," and ignore it when you're not. This skill will come in useful when writing a billion pages about [insert political science topic]. 

 

 

 

[wb3060]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Mid-ranked R1
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science; International Affairs; History minor
Undergrad GPA: 3.76
Type of Grad: Political science MA 
Grad GPA: 4.0
GRE: 163V, 159Q, 4.5A (Didn't retake after MA)
Any Special Courses: 3 quant methods classes, qualitative methods, research design
Letters of Recommendation: I think all three of my letters were really really good, all from faculty in my grad program (including the methods professor) 
Research Experience: 1.5 years of RA in grad school, 1 paper about to be sent out for review 
Teaching Experience: Taught my own global issues class
Subfield/Research Interests: IR 
Other: 3 internships, 1 fellowship abroad

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): UVA ($$), Maryland ($$), Georgetown (wait list for funding), American SIS ($$)
Waitlists: none
Rejections: GW
Pending: none
Going to: Almost at a decision... but not quite yet. 

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

I probably should have applied to more schools, including a few top programs. I would definitely recommend including a reach school, which I didn't really do. I am pretty happy with how things turned out though! 

 

My main advice is to not let yourself go crazy in the waiting period. My first result was a rejection, and I really let that get to me. I thought I was going to be rejected from everywhere and was pretty much in panic mode. But then I ended up getting in everywhere else, so all that mental anguish was for nothing! Applying to more schools would have helped with this anxiety as well.

 

For the SOP, I think specifically stating how certain faculty can add to your research or being very specific in how you fit in with the department really goes a long way. Likewise, discussing at length where you see your research going / future questions you want to explore is more beneficial than focusing solely on what you have already done. Although that is important, I think adcoms care just as much (if not more) about what you will do at the program and want to see that you are asking good questions and identifying puzzles. 

 

I will reiterate what others have said - start writing your SOP early. Review it and revise it for months. Write a long version and a short version (~1000 words and ~500). Don't put in anything cheesy or cliche. Think about what will make you stand out from the hundreds of others they read. Don't just make statements about your skills and abilities, back them up with evidence and examples. Don't just write your CV in essay form. For the SOPs where I had a strict word limit, I did not include anything really that could be gleaned from looking at my CV (internships, fellowships, etc.). Emphasize any and all research experience.

 

I think the importance of the GRE is generally overstated. My impression has been it's more of a threshold requirement. I'm not saying it is meaningless or bad scores won't be a red flag, but you can better invest your time improving your SOP or adding experience to your CV rather than trying to improve good scores to great scores. 

Edited March 23, 2016 by wb3060

[kwils76]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:  Northeastern R1
Major(s)/Minor(s): English & Political Science double major
Undergrad GPA: 3.6
Type of Grad: MS in Politics from a European university
Grad GPA: 3.9
GRE: 163V, 161Q, 4.5W
Any Special Courses: 
Letters of Recommendation: 2 from undergrad (including undergrad advisor) and 1 from grad dissertation supervisor. All know me very well and are relatively prominent in the field.
Research Experience: Undergraduate Honors Thesis; Quants-heavy Masters Dissertation
Teaching Experience: N/A
Subfield/Research Interests: Comparative
Other:

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Arizona State ($$), CUNY GC ($$), CU Boulder ($$)
Waitlists: UNC Chapel Hill, GW
Rejections: Stanford, Harvard, UC Berkeley, UCSD, Columbia, UMD College Park, Northwestern, UPenn
Pending: N/A
Going to: not 100% decided.

 

LESSONS LEARNED:
I wish I'd applied to more schools ranked in the 20s and 30s.
I definitely overshot a bit, possibly to my detriment. 

Still very pleased with where I will likely end up and excited to start this next chapter!

 

 

SOP:

[schuaust]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Low profile undergrad institution in Idaho
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science major, no minor
Undergrad GPA: 3.63 
GRE: Q: 154 V: 161 W: 4
Any Special Courses: Audited International Relations Theory graduate seminar. 
Letters of Recommendation: (3) all from within the department. All know me extremely well, one allowed me to audit a graduate course and another was a very non-traditional instructor and I assume he wrote a very unique LOR. 
Research Experience: (2) senior theses in IR, including defending and Honors thesis. Survey experience in Psychology, but nothing special or long term. No publications. 
Teaching Experience: None
Subfield/Research Interests: IR - especially the development/emergence of new states, consequences of IR theory in national defense policy and IR theory in general.

Other: Student senate campaign and a large amount of student activism, social media director for a local political organization, public speaking at various events involving social justice issues. 

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): Utah, a school in Idaho, Alabama ($$$)
Waitlists: None
Rejections: SDSU, Minnesota, Cornell, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio State, Colorado-Boulder
Pending: None
Going to: Alabama (Tuscaloosa)

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

(1) Rejections aren't an indictment of your quality as an academic or a reflection of what school see your potential for success as. Decisions are primarily based on fit, and to be quite honest, I applied to a couple of schools where fit was questionable (especially Iowa and Wisconsin). 

(2) Contact professors. Every school where I contacted professors early in the process accepted me. Initially I was hesitant to do so, but after reading advice on this forum and receiving rejections from every school that I *wanted* to go to, I took a chance on doing that at Alabama. Applying there was a very spur-of-the-moment decision, but after seeing the research interests of their faculty and communicating with several of them I knew it was a perfect fit, and was extremely relieved when I was accepted with full funding. Which brings us to:

(3) Be ready to move on. Your initial plans or dreams may not work out for various reasons. Be ready to change your approach and adapt quickly. New opportunities will arise, you may get an out-of-the-blue email from Alabama letting you know that they still have funding available and would love more students to apply...so take those chances late in the application process and don't be surprised if you don't end up where you expected.  

(4) Your undergrad record matters, but you can overcome even if it isn't the greatest. The schools that accepted me said that I had a great writing sample, and that it was able to overcome some of the weaknesses in my application. Knowing early that graduate school is a goal is helpful, as is knowing what you want your field to be. Many of us don't make those decisions until later. For a frame of reference, I started in engineering and was...to put it mildly...not particularly inclined to succeed in that field. So I had to overcome failure as an undergrad...and my failure was very measurable (lost scholarships, failed classes, etc.). These might put you out of the reach of top programs - and ultimately I don't know and don't care why schools didn't accept me because I am incredibly excited to be going to Alabama - but it does not mean that you won't get accepted somewhere that wants you and that will offer great opportunities. 

(5) Be comfortable selling yourself. I am not, and I felt very unnatural writing an SOP. Ultimately I decided mine was problematic and scrapped a majority of it for my Alabama application. My format was to (1) show how I became interested in Political Science and what aspects of the field appealed to me and (2) why I thought I was a good fit at a particular school. I believe that correspondence with departments really helped in offsetting the weakness of my SOP, but being straightforward in my SOP may have been helpful.

 

 

SOP:

PM

FINAL ADVICE: 

I hope that this really helps someone in their applications. Applying to graduate schools is a time consuming, sometimes even soul-sucking endeavor. Be sure to take care of yourself and when you need a break, take it. Go out with friends, watch a movie...whatever it is that helps you relax. I took a year off to apply to graduate programs, and I think for many that this is a good idea. For those of you embarking on this journey in your final year of studies, don't underestimate the time commitment of what you are doing. To be honest, I have no idea how much my volunteer experience helped in my application, but if you take a year off I think it is important to show that you were dedicated to learning while out of school.

Good luck!

Edited May 5, 2016 by schuaust
Added "other"

[CarefreeWritingsontheWall]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 3 Canadian University
Major(s)/Minor(s): Joint Honours Political Science & History, Minor in Economics
Undergrad GPA: CGPA 3.76/4.0, Major GPA: 3.9/4.0
Type of Grad: Top 3 Canadian University, MA (IR Concentration, Methods minor)
Grad GPA: 3.9/4.0
GRE: First attempt (August 2013): V154/Q149/AW5 & Second Attempt (November 2015): V158/Q152/AW6
Any Special Courses: ICPSR + semester long course in regression analysis at my current institution.

Letters of Recommendation: 

1. A tenured IR political science professor, known for six years. I also TAed for two of their classes.
2. Associate professor. Senior thesis and MA supervisor for whom I’ve been an RA since the third year of my BA and am now TAing for this winter (known for 3.5 years at time of writing letters). Tenure track, well published despite being junior.
3. Assistant tenure track professor who worked outside my field of interest (comparative developing focus) that I took an honours seminar with during my senior year of my BA. They’ve remained a mentor to me during my MA.
4. If I could submit an additional letter, it was from a tenured history professor (DGS of his department) I met during the second year of my BA and with whom I did an independent study during my third year and worked closely with until my MA.

I intended to submit a fifth, from a methods professor, but they were expecting their first child in December so the timing didn’t work out.

I chose a variety of people who have mentored me in different ways, but who knew me best. I asked them to focus on different aspects of my profile: the first has seen me transition from a naïve freshman to a wannabe PhD student; the second has mentored and pushed my work intellectually and methodologically by supporting my training in quantitative methods, while also inspiring me to focus on my current area of interest and thus speak to my substantive interests and skills; the third is someone outside my field of interest who can comment on my work ethic and passion for the discipline, as well as contextualize the strengths of my BA and MA programs overall; the fourth I asked to speak to my preferred interdisciplinary approach to research, as well as the qualitative research work I’ve done. I also asked the second and fourth writers to stress that my GRE scores (V&Q) were not representative of my potential and highlight my additional training in methods relevant to the field and exposure to PhD level courses 

Research Experience: Senior thesis during BA and independent study course. MA thesis. RA work for 3.5 years, as well as outside work for a law professor.
Teaching Experience: Four TAships during my MA (1 per semester), mentorship of international students for 2 years during my BA.
Subfield/Research Interests: International Relations – IPE.
Other: External scholarship covering tuition from for 3 years. CGS-M SSHRC award for 2015-2016, and 4 other mid-range scholarships and research grants between both degrees.

RESULTS:
Acceptances($$ or no $$): 4 acceptances, all with funding.
Waitlists: None
Rejections: Stanford, Columbia, Harvard, Georgetown
Pending: None
Going to: Happily decided. 

LESSONS LEARNED: 

1. It is absolutely amazing how far you can go in two years time. Two years ago I was writing a post in the 2014 government wrap-up affairs threads (see here: http://forum.thegradcafe.com/topic/53232-government-affairs-2014-wrap-up-final-decisions/#comment-1058121021) I was sitting there, one month before finishing my BA, facing rejections from every MPA program I applied to. I wasn’t ready to leave school yet but my confidence was crushed. What a turn around.
2. When I started my MA I wasn’t certain that I wanted to apply for a PhD. At the end of my first year it was evident to me that I truly loved the academic lifestyle, something made even more concrete when I was able to take my work with me and travel for three of my four months off this past summer. I should note that I very, very, very, nearly didn’t apply when I was too busy to spend a month solid preparing to re-take my GREs in the Fall. My hesitation didn’t stem from doubt over whether or not I wanted to go, but whether or not my profile was competitive enough to get into American programs. I wound up writing the test and only doing moderately well again (during my first attempt my scores were crap because I experienced a power outage an hour in and had to sit for 30 minutes panicking over whether I had to restart). I followed through because I had a very inspirational discussion with letter writer #4 and found myself knowing that this is what I wanted and I wouldn’t know if I couldn’t get in if I didn’t try. Knowing that you want this is important and an MA can help you trial run – it’s effectively like the first 2 years of your PhD if it’s a longer, academically oriented program. 
3. I applied to programs that fit with my methodological and ontological focus with at least 2-3 people I could see myself working with. Each SOP was tailored to that program (explained more below). I learned a lot about my preferred approach to research, both theoretically and methodologically, in the last two years which was really important when I considered fit beyond whether there were POIs at a program who simply substantively studied what I studied.
4. I also found that there was a lot of great advice online: Chris Blattman’s blogs on how to write an SOP, as well as Dan Nexon’s posts on the Duck of Minerva with suggestions on program choice and SOP writing:
   1. http://chrisblattman.com/about/contact/gradschool/ (Scroll down to his “Words on Personal Statements)
   2. http://duckofminerva.com/2012/08/applying-for-phd-in-political-science.html
5. Fit is important, but so is your network and I think this point is very underestimated by a number of people. I’m fortunate in that I’ve been able to work with a number of scholars who were trained in the US and who are still very much integrated into the US conference scene. Two of my letter writers have written extensively with a number of POIs across the 8 programs I applied to. This isn’t to say that everything can work out great because of connections alone, but I did feel more confident that my application would be taken seriously despite some pitfalls because of my network.
6. The other side of this coin is that I know that my letter writers know me very well. They have seen me at my absolute best and worst. I trusted them to write detailed statements, and we also talked about what their letter would accomplish for my profile. This is a really important discussion to have. While it’s awkward to ask, they understand and if anything are assisted by you describing what you’re aiming to accomplish. Do not underestimate the value of building your network early and just being friendly. There's a difference between getting to know your professors vs. getting close to them only for a letter.
7. Departmental issues can be a problem – do what you can to ascertain the state of the game when and if you visit. Talk to current students and POIs after you’ve been accepted. These people genuinely don’t want you to come to their program and be miserable because you’re all the more likely to drop out. In my experience, the best departments will be open about both their strengths and weaknesses, as well as impending departures. During visit days, be collegial and friendly with current grads and ask faculty the hard questions. What are their hiring strategies? What are the departments goals in the next 3-5 years? How many students does a faculty member typically sit on a dissertation committee for? How are TAships structured? Does the department sponsor social events for faculty and students? Are students encouraged to work together on problem sets? Do students compete for TAships and RAships? Is there conference funding? Are there research centers that would support your work? Is there office space for graduate students? Are PhD students allowed to take outside jobs on top of their funding packages? What is the housing situation like for graduate students on and around campus?
8. Lastly, this process is expensive and taxing, but be prepared to invest in yourself – and view it in that respect! (Prices Expressed in Canadian Dollars:

• - GRE Prep (Round 1: Kaplan Online Course & Books, Round 2: Magoosh with Manhattan Prep Books/Flashcards & the Official Guide) - $1000
• - GRE Test Fee x2 - $500
• - Travel to write GRE x2 - $300
• - Application fees (Round 1: $250, Round 2: $1000) - $1250
• - Grand Total: $3050 CAD on applications & related expenses.
  • It’s pricey, but there’s a learning process involved. I learned a lot about myself during my first application cycle, and even more so this time around.

*I also very much recommend Magoosh and Manhattan Prep of all the test prep resources I got my hands on. I found the practice questions and tutorials to be the clearest, and most practical. Had I had more than two weeks to prepare, I know I could have mastered this test using these resources. I would also reiterate that spending time mastering this test is worthwhile but no more than 2 months of solid prep or you'll probably go crazy (I know I did). Writing it a second time has its benefits but given the costs, I really wish I hadn't experienced technical failures the first time (and in that case I really should have asked for money back to something but I didn't).

SOP: Don’t feel comfortable posting, but here is a rough idea of how I structured things: I had two baseline versions, one at ~500 words, another at ~1000 depending on the program’s word limit, written in LaTex. I introduced my research interest by discussing a puzzle that has motivated my current work and then expanded that into a potential dissertation on the topic. I transitioned to describing my research experience/educational background that had led me to this puzzle, as well as who I worked with in the last 6 years that inspired me to pursue this career path. I then moved to discuss why X university’s program could build on what I’ve learned to get me where I want to go – the academic career path. I stressed what I liked about every program I applied to, namely how it was structured, what my intended major/minor was, as well as something unique about it I was really drawn to, and how it fit with my interests. I also indicated potential POIs and how their work has proven influential to my current studies (beyond name dropping). I aimed to list at least three people per statement, if not more. When it came to the length difference, the first part about myself was the same and quite short - where I expanded if I had more than 500 words was on how I fit with their prospective program, and why their program was the best fit for what I want to do.

Personally, I didn’t like what the document turned out to be. I have a hard time writing up my CV let alone an SOP. I had three professors review it, and letter writer #2 edited several versions and gave me great comments. They were also very reassuring, despite my not liking how it read and more than willing to give me tips on how to write it. I also ensured that I sounded like myself in it, which in my previous round of applications was not the case after my supervisor edited it. I again agree with what others have said that it’s important to re-write it several times. The final version that I submitted was undoubtedly my best version.