Fall 2010 applicants

[carrar]

Hi all,

I've been planning on applying for a PhD for a few years, but this is finally the year!

My subfield is IR.

I'm not applying to super top-tier programs because of fit and probably because of confidence as well. After several years of only occasionally dipping into IR, it's more difficult to think and write academically. I give myself a 50-50 chance.

Edited June 2, 2012 by carrar

[pablo]

looks like someone else got an acceptance email from berkeley ... are we going to write this one off as well?

Hello! Where are you getting all these reports of acceptances from, if I may ask? Thanks.

[Ziz]

And now there's 3 Berkeleys. Still feel like one of those is a fake to 'prove' the others weren't fakes. I feel like there wouldn't be such a trickle...should be some rejections to accompany the acceptances if we go by the typical 'definite yeses and definite nos early on, everyone else later' schedule.

[Cicero]

And now there's 3 Berkeleys. Still feel like one of those is a fake to 'prove' the others weren't fakes. I feel like there wouldn't be such a trickle...should be some rejections to accompany the acceptances if we go by the typical 'definite yeses and definite nos early on, everyone else later' schedule.

I'm also skeptical about believing these. Based on people I know who applied last year, all the admits were contacted via email en masse, and a bunch of acceptances were posted on the results page here at once, not a slow trickle like this. I don't expect to hear anything from Berkeley until early Feb. Although, if they want to contact me early to accept me, I won't mind.

[FrostedAmbassador]

Hi all. After looking over this forum a few times, I decided that I couldn't pass up the anonymous camaraderie.

I plan on majoring in Political Theory, and depending where I end up, minoring in either American Politics or Public Law (so as to satisfy my interest in constitutional theory). As for the major, I want to focus on the Continentals, and am most interested in Nietzsche and Heidegger. Secondary interests include the history of political philosophy (especially ancient) and American political thought (particularly the Founding). My top choice is Duke, with Chicago and Harvard not far behind; Notre Dame is a great academic fit, but I'd rather be just about anywhere than South Bend for the next five to six years (even if the campus is beautiful). I still don't know if my application is complete at Columbia, Harvard, UCLA or UT-Austin, which just makes me feel warm all over.

Here are my stats - they're decent, but nothing spectacular. I don't really have any safeties, so I tried to apply to a lot of schools. I'm thinking two to four acceptances is realistic.

720 V (this was honestly really disappointing), 720 Q, 4.5 AW (hoping this doesn't hurt me too much)

Graduating in spring from top public; Overall 3.82, Major 3.81

Very enthusiastic letters (then again, whose aren't?) from well-regarded full professors

Currently working on an honors thesis, writing sample was introductory chapter

It's nice to know that I'm not the only person currently going through this exhausting and nerve-wracking process. Best of luck to everyone!

Edited January 9, 2010 by FrostedAmbassador

[Cicero]

Just wondering, but does anyone have any thoughts regarding why Harvard's Government department does not require a writing sample from applicants, and in fact specifically requests that applicants do not submit one?

"Applicants are requested not to submit writing samples."

http://www.gsas.harvard.edu/programs_of_study/government.php

My initial thought was, since they are a top rated program and probably get tons of applicants, they don't want all the extra paper to sift through, but then again, other top-tier schools, who I'm sure also get many applicants, such as Berkeley, Chicago, Princeton etc do ask applicants to submit an academic writing sample.

[Cicero]

They must just not think that writing samples are particularly helpful in their admissions process, for whatever reason. To be honest, if you wrote a significant piece of research, such as a senior thesis, your advisor should probably be one of your LORs, so an evaluation of your writing and research abilities would be provided through that letter. In addition, your SOP provides a sample of your writing.

I agree with letter writers being able to attest to your writing ability; I figured that LORs are where programs who don't ask for the writing sample look to find an evaluation of an applicant's academic writing, outside of what they may infer from course grades.

I just thought it was interesting that some programs neglect to ask for a writing sample.

While the SOP does provide a general idea of an applicant's writing ability, I do not think it speaks to how well someone can write academically. Poor writing in a SOP might suggest something about the applicant's ability (or potential) to write well academically. However I don't think just because someone's SOP is well written that it necessarily follows that their academic writing is of the same quality. Although I am sure that it is often true that most people who write good personal statements also write well academically. I just don't think the SOP is the best measure of someone's ability to write academically, which I guess is why some programs ask for a writing sample.

Perhaps it is just as you said, the schools that don't ask for them don't find them helpful

[anxiousapplicant]

They must just not think that writing samples are particularly helpful in their admissions process, for whatever reason. To be honest, if you wrote a significant piece of research, such as a senior thesis, your advisor should probably be one of your LORs, so an evaluation of your writing and research abilities would be provided through that letter. In addition, your SOP provides a sample of your writing.

I agree with letter writers being able to attest to your writing ability; I figured that LORs are where programs who don't ask for the writing sample look to find an evaluation of an applicant's academic writing, outside of what they may infer from course grades.

I just thought it was interesting that some programs neglect to ask for a writing sample.

While the SOP does provide a general idea of an applicant's writing ability, I do not think it speaks to how well someone can write academically. Poor writing in a SOP might suggest something about the applicant's ability (or potential) to write well academically. However I don't think just because someone's SOP is well written that it necessarily follows that their academic writing is of the same quality. Although I am sure that it is often true that most people who write good personal statements also write well academically. I just don't think the SOP is the best measure of someone's ability to write academically, which I guess is why some programs ask for a writing sample.

Perhaps it is just as you said, the schools that don't ask for them don't find them helpful

I thought too that the LOR could attest to the research skills. So I picked two letter writers who could do that--one for whom I wrote several research papers, and one for whom I have written research papers and worked for as a research assistant. So for my writing sample, I used a paper for philosophy that wasn't a research paper but that required me to make a thesis, defend it, and answer objections. I thought that style would be better because although the schools want you to be able to research, this type of paper just deals with plain old ability to think/write, and my LORs could deal with the research aspect. My SOP frankly sucks. I just don't know how to sell myself, how to talk myself up. I guess the two positions quoted above are not opposite positions at all; the LOR can attest to research ability, whereas the writing sample can demonstrate academic writing better than the SOP.

[NEPA]

On another note, has anyone heard anything from their programs? Things have been pretty quiet for me, beyond schools confirming that the applications are complete.

Dead silent for me.

[Ziz]

I heard from Edinburgh but they do rolling admissions. No word from any North American schools.

[natofone]

Congrats!

[michal]

Which schools email about applications being complete? I've checked a couple of the status checkers and everything's complete, but not for every school, and I haven't gotten emails specifically saying that my application is complete. It should be, though, given that at a few schools it is and everything was submitted properly.

[lev calderon]

College: Liberal-arts college ranked by USNEWS 12-30

Overall: 3.55 < x < 3.65

Political Theory: 3.85 < x < 3.95

Law School: USNEWS 10-20

Work experience: 2 years as attorney.

GRE:

730 < x < 800 VERBAL

730 < x < 800 QUANTITATIVE

6.0 ANALYTIC

 

Research experience: law review ed; RA in law school;

 

Languages: Latin-based European language (fluent); Middle eastern language (reading fluency).

 

AOS: Political Theory, American Government

 

Applied:

Yale, Princeton, Harvard

Columbia, NYU, MIT

WashU, Johns Hopkins

[lev calderon]

for the record, i think my heart is going to take a beating during this whole notification process. i just got a standard email entitled "yale graduate school application status" and nearly had a heartattack.

time to take up yoga.

I wouldn't worry -- you're pretty much the paragon of an admitted applicant. Plus from the looks of things, you meet the profile of HYP grad school types: financially comfortable, e.g. don't have to worry about working during the PHD, rushing through the dissertation, being anxious about well-paid placements, etc.

[lev calderon]

for the record, i think my heart is going to take a beating during this whole notification process. i just got a standard email entitled "yale graduate school application status" and nearly had a heartattack.

time to take up yoga.

This is a test: Can you spot the grammatical error in Yale's email:

"Be certain to visit the Frequesntly Asked Questions section (Questions Not Answered) for specific instructions on how to address your e-mail. "

[econwonk1010]

for the record, i think my heart is going to take a beating during this whole notification process. i just got a standard email entitled "yale graduate school application status" and nearly had a heartattack.

time to take up yoga.

Good god I'm glad I'm not the only one. I just let out a yelp when I read the subject line in Gmail (in the middle of my office)...

[Cicero]

Ditto on the near heart attack. I still got really anxious/excited even though I know (based on past results postings) not to expect anything decision related from Yale until early to mid February. I think these subject headings should include a disclaimer ie "Warning! Admission decision not included"

That's a curious spelling of "frequently". Good spotting lev calderon!

[lev calderon]

Ditto on the near heart attack. I still got really anxious/excited even though I know (based on past results postings) not to expect anything decision related from Yale until early to mid February. I think these subject headings should include a disclaimer ie "Warning! Admission decision not included"

That's a curious spelling of "frequently". Good spotting lev calderon!

Well it totally reveals the psychology of the email-writer. The author spelled "Frequently" with a derivation of "Request" and if you look at the sentence prior to the grammatical error you see the word "request". Grammar is a logical capacity of the human mind to categorize words using heuristics that code for data and depends deeply on one's capacity for memory. In short, one would have expected the email-author to have had a greater capacity for neural data storage in order to avoid the tendency of lower-IQ's to parse words due to limited memory capacity. Or, for the less intellectually-inclined, EDIT!

[carrar]

Which schools email about applications being complete? I've checked a couple of the status checkers and everything's complete, but not for every school, and I haven't gotten emails specifically saying that my application is complete. It should be, though, given that at a few schools it is and everything was submitted properly.

I received an email on 01/04 from the grad program assistant at Minnesota stating my application is complete. I then got another email from the system the next day saying that it was forwarded to the department for review. But other than online status checkers (which I check when I get home from work every day--just in case!), I've not received any other emails.

[ladedodaday]

On 1/12/2010 at 5:09 PM, carrar said:

I received an email on 01/04 from the grad program assistant at Minnesota stating my application is complete. I then got another email from the system the next day saying that it was forwarded to the department for review. But other than online status checkers (which I check when I get home from work every day--just in case!), I've not received any other emails.

I think other people have covered most of the schools that have sent out emails, but WUSTL should get a special mention for their incredibly friendly emails. 

[graduatingsoon]

you meet the profile of HYP grad school types: financially comfortable, e.g. don't have to worry about working during the PHD, rushing through the dissertation, being anxious about well-paid placements, etc.

really? I guess I missed that section in the FAQ pages of the Harvard and Yale sites.

[lev calderon]

really? I guess I missed that section in the FAQ pages of the Harvard and Yale sites.

http://chronicle.com/article/If-You-Must-Go-to-Grad-School/45269/

And, as a historical matter, only the super-rich attended PhD programs (the first American University to offer the PhD was Johns Hopkins -- e.g. Woodrow Wilson, John Dewey).

There's an unmistakable reality that those at Harvard and its class of PhD programs are independently wealthy.

[readeatsleep]

i agree. lev, youre simplifying things at an alarming and offensive rate. 'only the super rich attend PhD programs' is a silly thing to say. additionally, proposing that wealth should allay concerns about admission to a top ranked program is illogical and insulting.

[Cicero]

Well it totally reveals the psychology of the email-writer. The author spelled "Frequently" with a derivation of "Request" and if you look at the sentence prior to the grammatical error you see the word "request". Grammar is a logical capacity of the human mind to categorize words using heuristics that code for data and depends deeply on one's capacity for memory. In short, one would have expected the email-author to have had a greater capacity for neural data storage in order to avoid the tendency of lower-IQ's to parse words due to limited memory capacity. Or, for the less intellectually-inclined, EDIT!

One could also note that the letters "e" and "s" are near each other on the keyboard. It is quite likely that the typist's finger slipped when writing the email. I don't think there is any reason to think any less of a person or question their intelligence because of a minor spelling error. Typos happen.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Cicero

[lev calderon]

i agree. lev, youre simplifying things at an alarming and offensive rate. 'only the super rich attend PhD programs' is a silly thing to say. additionally, proposing that wealth should allay concerns about admission to a top ranked program is illogical and insulting.

See: http://chronicle.com...l-in-the/44846/ --

"As things stand, I can only identify a few circumstances under which one might reasonably consider going to graduate school in the humanities:

• You are independently wealthy, and you have no need to earn a living for yourself or provide for anyone else.
• You come from that small class of well-connected people in academe who will be able to find a place for you somewhere.
• You can rely on a partner to provide all of the income and benefits needed by your household.
• You are earning a credential for a position that you already hold — such as a high-school teacher — and your employer is paying for it.

Those are the only people who can safely undertake doctoral education in the humanities. Everyone else who does so is taking an enormous personal risk the full consequences of which they cannot assess because they do not understand how the academic-labor system works and will not listen to people who try to tell them."

Think about the most famous political theorists or philosophers -- I can't think of any that didn't come from money. I think the facts are different in natural sciences and empirical social sciences, but otherwise I think the overwhelming majority of successful academics come from $$$. I actually think William James wrote an essay on this called "The PhD Octopus." Also cf. Dinesh D'Souza "Professor Moneybags" National Review (http://www.accessmyl...demics-get.html)

Plus, if anyone here argues that where you went to UGRAD matters for PhD admissions, then cf. http://www.insidehig...06/12/kimbrough (elite college kids are overwhelmingly from $$$).

I think Benton/Pannepaker is making an economic argument: the economic signals for non-empirical social sciences/humanities are pretty transparent: you're not doing economically profitable work, it's not very translatable, and there aren't institutions that readily fund your research (e.g. no NIH grants).

We all seem to understand this reality because we apply to top-1o schools. Typically, if you don't go to a top-10 school and you want to do non-empirical social science, you're placement chances are slims. The reason rank matters so much in disciplines like law, political science and the humanities is because it's hard to price one's scholarship, so you price proxy mechanisms and create an artificial market that way.

In the natural sciences, salaries are at least partially determined by grants money and people apply to schools based on research agendas solely, knowing that a PhD from Harvard in neuroscience and a PhD from Texas Tech in neuroscience aren't going to lead to large salary differentials. Plus -- just look at science PhDs admissions -- they INTERVIEW and pay for flights because they have money. To succeed in a profession where there's limited external funds often means a) one is a natural super star or one is very good and has independent wealth. Plus, the natural science/economics heavily weigh the post-doc system and in these sciences the post-doc institution often means more than the PhD institution. Also look at faculty: a typical biology faculty will have a range of schools where professors got their phd but you can best a top 50 political science professor went to a top 10 school. There's also the same parallel in professional school: for MDs, the intership/residency institution matters more than the MD institution and most MD faculty at top 10 medical schools come from a range of MD institutions whereas in legal education top 50 professors went to top 5-10 schools. THe key is that the sciences sell patents, they get grants from corporations and pharmaceutical companies and they do translational research that is relevant to health or drugs. There's less of an internal incentive for the professors to have independent wealth. The incentives are clearly different in non-empirical political science. Obviously, for our methods cousins, they can get big grants, placements at banks and firms, etc.

Wittgenstein, Russell, W.Wilson, W.James, etc. came from money; M.Nussbaum, R.Dworkin married into it.

Edited January 14, 2010 by lev calderon