Fall 2010 Admission Results

[lev calderon]

Maybe this is just limited to political theory, but it seems to me that subfield strength is infinitely more important than overall departmental strength in terms of placement. For instance, a graduate of Chicago is much more likely to get a job teaching theory at a top program than a graduate of Michigan or Stanford. If I were applying to study theory, I would choose Hopkins over MIT in a heartbeat, even though MIT is a "top 10" program and Hopkins is ranked 39th by US News.

Could the study be limited? I only applied to east coast schools and will only be looking for east coast placements post phd, e.g. I'd sacrifice placement if it meant staying in the region. If a lot of people, esp. Ivy league graduates behave in such a manner, then you could have a group of highly qualified phd candidates with a low placement percentage due to regional preferences. And, in many ways, even a brown phd can get away with this (eg avoid placement) with more ease than a rochester phd simply because the ivies have more cash. Under the east coast snob analysis, I'm not sure placement equates to quality.

And to whoever said think tanks are academic backups: the center for neuroeconomics is a think tank with more nobel laureates than any political science department. Again, preferences matter.

[someone else]

I always question the logic of those who "apply to only the top ten" or "to all of the top ten schools" etc... The fact of the matter is that as long as you do a good job in grad school, publish some work, and become known in your field, then finding a good job will not be difficult (assuming that the job market will be a lot better when we get our PhDs). The most important qualification is whether the school is a perfect fit for you. Do you like the program, the professors, the aide package, the location, your fellow graduate students, etc… Based upon those principles, I applied to two top 20s, a top 30, and a top 40. Would I have been accepted by at least one top 10 school, I am pretty certain that I would. But, those schools were not the best fit for me.

In closing, it should be noted that the most cutting edge research in my opinion, is not conducted at the top 10 schools.

Edited February 6, 2010 by someone else

[APGradApplicant]

OK, I'm not going to name any names here, but I must say that some of the comments I'm reading on this board are starting to make me think that there is credence to the stereotype that academia can be a very stuffy and elitist profession. My main focus as a soon-to-be graduate student is gaining the opportunity to get solid training that will allow me to be a good professor who students enjoy learning from. Of course I hope to have the opportunity in my career as a professor to conduct research and publish papers- who wouldn't? But at the same time, if I end up working at a terminal MA or (gasp!) BA program, I'd be far from disappointed. What I care most about isn't money (because frankly I already have plenty of that being one of those trust-fund kids) or prestige, but instead being able to make a difference in people's lives. Where I get my training of course matters, but I don't share the view that some on this board seem to harbor that if a person gets their PhD at a non-top-ten program such as UC-Davis or Florida State (see signature below) that they're going to have a miserable time finding a job or that if they don't then that's the exception, not the rule.

I have never wished those going to top-of-the-heap programs anything but congratulations. But I must say that it's really a turn-off when people start projecting this "better than" attitude to the point where it becomes dismissive of anybody who isn't joining them in the Ivy League.

[thatsnotmyname]

OK, I'm not going to name any names here, but I must say that some of the comments I'm reading on this board are starting to make me think that there is credence to the stereotype that academia can be a very stuffy and elitist profession.

Well said. Your whole post actually, but I don't want to quote the whole thing. I think people assume that everyone in this degree wants to be teaching or researching at an R1, and for some of us, that's not the ultimate goal. As a female, I plan to have a family and a life outside of work, and being tenure track at Harvard may not be the best option for me in 6-7 years. Going to a "lower" ranked program doesn't really bother me because of that. Moreover, I'd rather be with a cohort that's collaborative than competitive and childish.

Also, this is the results thread- for posting results or info when results are expected. Maybe issues of rank or what cpaige should do with her life (no offense meant to you of course, its just an example of off topic conversation) can move to a separate thread? Just a friendly suggestion

[thatsnotmyname]

I guess I am basing my opinion of the field off of my understanding of it- true there may be options about university policy I haven't considered. At the age of 21 I guess it may be early to be thinking about a family and TT positions, but with my current knowledge of "the world" l'm just consider where I want to be ten years from now, and I don't mean just in terms of a career. This very well may change as I progress through my degree and gather a deeper understanding of how the field works. People can change their mind, I'm just stating my opinion at this point in time.

As far as the environment of schools go, I guess no one can make claims to what a school is really like unless they go there. However, from my discussion with recent PhD grads, the general atmosphere of this thread, and frankly even the majority consensus at PSJR (maybe not the best source I admit), students at a top ten program are highly competitive. This can be both a good and bad thing- I guess it really depends upon how an individual fits in at a university. I suppose whatever distrust in cohorts at top ten programs I have can in part be attributed to my annoyance with over-the-top competition that I've experienced too much and frankly let overrun my life. This is part of the reason why I didn't apply to law school- because I would have immersed myself in competition in a very unhealthy way.

I guess the point of my posts was just to state my opinion that top-ten is not the end all be all. Some people might like to teach at a low ranked SLAC because of location, research opportunities or other personal reasons, and one does not necessarily need a top-ten degree to achieve that. I didn't intend to attack those who hold the rankings in high regard if that's how it came across, to each her/his own I always say

Edit: Sorry guys- off topic again because of me this time.

Edited February 7, 2010 by thatsnotmyname

[CrimsonBlue]

Apparently some people misread my previous posts. To summarize what I think:

1. It's better to do research first and then use your financial resources and effort in choosing programs to apply. For me, top 10 schools came out to be right, so this is why I did it. Also I want to stay in academia, and I know I would be better off at a top 10 institution.

2. Do not focus on big institution name values: what I said was that a lot of people apply to Ivies, thinking their overall reputations are the same as those of the programs there.

We all have different goals, some of our career goals do not have to stay in academia and may need big institutional name values. I am at one of the Ivies. While I don't feel the privilege while I am here, it is indeed something people respect and envy at the same time. It's definitely a plus if you want to do something else besides professorship. For instance, while Brown's poli sci department is not one of the best, if you tell the general public that you did a ph.d. at Brown, this will impress many of your business partners.

[natofone]

Apparently some people misread my previous posts.

You think?

[LordNorth]

Just got my second acceptance this morning from UCL - European Studies. Very happy, though pressure is now on as they want a response in a month.

MA? I know three people who've studied European Studies at UCL, or else a master's in their School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies department, and all have thoroughly enjoyed it. UCL is also well respected internationally. Two of the people I know have gone on to do PhD in the US, fully funded! So I think it should be a very tempting option for you. Congratulations!

[michal]

I just got back from three internet-less days in Egypt. I had nearly a hundred unread emails awaiting me upon my return. Not a single one was from a school Arghhhhhh.

[Tan]

I just got back from three internet-less days in Egypt. I had nearly a hundred unread emails awaiting me upon my return. Not a single one was from a school Arghhhhhh.

Haha! I know what you mean. Every time I leave my computer for many hours I come back convinced I have to have received some response from some school... and of course there's nothing. Only one of the schools I applied to appears to have sent out any responses at this point, so all of my stress has been for nothing for now. Hopefully there'll be some action this week?

Also, I see someone just posted having been accepted to Yale on Thursday via e-mail, though I think someone contacted the Yale office on Friday and they said there wouldn't be formal responses for a week or two?

Edited February 7, 2010 by Tan

[APGradApplicant]

What people should realize is that schools will often tell you that they aren't sending responses for a couple of weeks, even after a few people have already been admitted. UNC admitted some folks at the end of January and then at least one more this past Friday, February 5 (and I have to imagine that person was not the only one). I'm wondering if some schools admit some very well-qualified applicants earlier on and then have the adcom re-convene to make the tougher choices. That wouldn't be out of the question.

[backstreets]

I think that's right. I work for a prof on the admissions committee of a top program, and they knew at the outset that they'd be admitting 2 or 3 people to their subfield, and then there was a lot of delay and discussion in determining the admissions status of the rest on their short list (again, within the subfield, not department-wide), so I think there's a lot of prioritization in terms of when decisions are rendered.

[APGradApplicant]

By the way, for us UCSD applicants, here's the good news (and I'm sure you've all noticed what I'm about to say, but I'll reiterate it just in case). Unlike most schools, UCSD last year sent out all of their acceptances in one day (Wednesday, February 11) and then sent out all the rejections the next (Thursday, February 12). Thus, there's a good chance that sometime this week, those of us who don't have e-mails from Jennifer Evangelista (UCSD grad coord) on the day that people are claiming acceptances, will at least have the peace of mind that we'll need to explore options outside of La Jolla.

Definitely awaiting this one anxiously.

[CrimsonBlue]

By the way, for us UCSD applicants, here's the good news (and I'm sure you've all noticed what I'm about to say, but I'll reiterate it just in case). Unlike most schools, UCSD last year sent out all of their acceptances in one day (Wednesday, February 11) and then sent out all the rejections the next (Thursday, February 12). Thus, there's a good chance that sometime this week, those of us who don't have e-mails from Jennifer Evangelista (UCSD grad coord) on the day that people are claiming acceptances, will at least have the peace of mind that we'll need to explore options outside of La Jolla.

Definitely awaiting this one anxiously.

Thanks for this. I would very much like to hear from UCSD for its strength in IPE. I actually applied to the joint program in Political Science and International Affairs, so I might hear back later than those of you who applied to the Political Science program.

[anxiousmike]

What people should realize is that schools will often tell you that they aren't sending responses for a couple of weeks, even after a few people have already been admitted. UNC admitted some folks at the end of January and then at least one more this past Friday, February 5 (and I have to imagine that person was not the only one). I'm wondering if some schools admit some very well-qualified applicants earlier on and then have the adcom re-convene to make the tougher choices. That wouldn't be out of the question.

Clinging to this notion for one school. It seems like the rest I have applied to haven't sent out any decisions yet.

[anxiousmike]

Got my first result via postal yesterday (parents somehow forgot to call me and tell me-I am out of the country). Waitlisted at a school near the end of my list. I already know three other schools I applied to sent out the first round of acceptances. My anxiety is turning into full fledged despair.

[APGradApplicant]

Got my first result via postal yesterday (parents somehow forgot to call me and tell me-I am out of the country). Waitlisted at a school near the end of my list. I already know three other schools I applied to sent out the first round of acceptances. My anxiety is turning into full fledged despair.

Did you pick a safety that was at least a good fit and somewhere you'd be happy to go to (if not the most prestigious)? I did that with UGA (and in the case that shit really hit the fan, Oklahoma and Albany). Always a good strategy to have.

[anxiousmike]

Did you pick a safety that was at least a good fit and somewhere you'd be happy to go to (if not the most prestigious)? I did that with UGA (and in the case that shit really hit the fan, Oklahoma and Albany). Always a good strategy to have.

Yeah, I have a safety, but I really thought that the school at which I'm now waitlisted was where I'd end up and right in my range. I'm just freaking out that this spells doom and gloom from here on out.

[natofone]

Next week!

[Ziz]

Anyone want to take a gamble on who we'll hear from this week?

[thatsnotmyname]

Anyone want to take a gamble on who we'll hear from this week?

My guess (hope) is Yale, NYU and Cornell, based on past admissions results.

[FairGame]

My guess (hope) is Yale, NYU and Cornell, based on past admissions results.

UVA too (not that I'm paying attention or anything... )

[tomorrows verse]

I doubt we'll hear from Cornell this week. Tina Slater has sent out several emails stating that all decisions (acceptances and rejections) will not be out until March. Maybe some individual professors will notify some of their potential advisees, but I doubt we will hear anything official from Cornell until March. I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

[yellowshoes]

I'd say UT Austin is a good bet.

[APGradApplicant]

Make that two votes for UT-Austin. UNC might finish up acceptances if it hasn't already. As stated earlier, UCSD historically has notified this coming week as well.