What area of poli sci do the top PhD programs specialize in?

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

Hey Guys,

I'm doing some preliminary research on which PhD program I should apply to.  I am very interested in American/Comparative Politics, specifically in the institutional analysis subfield.  However, I am unfamiliar with the top 10 PhD programs specialties in political science.  I know that Columbia and NYU are known for their political economy and quant programs, respectively.  But I'm unfamiliar with the others (Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, UCLA, UCSD, Duke, etc).  I know that fit is incredibly important when applying to certain departments, so any help would be greatly appreciated.  

[not@prof_yet]

I've recently been going through the top programs' faculty pages (specifically CP people) to indentify potential POIs by looking at descriptions of their current research and CVs. It was fairly time consuming but definitely a good experience.

 

All of this is with regards to the CP faculty, I cannot speak to the other subfields. I remember that Yale had a lot of people working on conflict and war. Cal had a really strong traditional CPE group. Princeton and Columbia had a lot of people working on the Middle East and Africa (Columbia particularly had a lot of people working on ethnic politics and patronage/clientelism). NYU had the deepest quant group (especially social networks; which also meant that it didn't seem like a lot of people had deep substantive knowledge in specific areas). HSMP were all pretty balanced, with Michigan and Princeton having a lot of people doing field work and experiments. 

 

I personally liked Princeton and Michigan the best, they had a deep faculty list filled with people that most CP students could work with (in my opinion). I also kept these descriptions pretty general, so I welcome additional discussion and corrections.

 

 

Edited August 17, 2017 by not@prof_yet

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

not@prof_yet:  Ya i've been doing similar work, going through different departments' CV and seeing if I can decipher which areas of specialty they are good at.  But it's sometimes a bit difficult to discern.  Stanford and Princeton seemed to have the professors doing research closest to my interests.      

[deutsch1997bw]

Duke is an interesting case.

Here are the possible majors for PhD students:

Political Behavior & Identities
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Methodology
Security, Peace, and Con ict
Normative Political Theory & Political Philosophy 

Note that you can't actually major in comparative politics, IR, etc.

I think it's particularly strong in political economy and quantitative methodology.

 

[guest56436]

Generally CHYMPS departments are strong across the board; they will have solid scholars in all subfields. There are exceptions however, for example, Harvard isn't particularly strong in IR.

As you get to the latter parts of the top 10 you'll notice that some departments are stronger in one or two, but weak in multiple. This trend becomes even more prevalent in the top 20. Theory is often the one with the most variation. 

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

@Comparativist So in your opinion, of the CHYMPS departments, which have the strongest faculty in American/Comparative?  

[guest56436]

25 minutes ago, Cristian Reyes said:

@Comparativist So in your opinion, of the CHYMPS departments, which have the strongest faculty in American/Comparative?  

Like I said, these are the top programs in the world - they are all strong in comparative and American. Perhaps your could make the argument there are some weaker ones. Yale's American subfield seems to be in a bit of disarray right now, I think Michigan's comparative subfield is weaker UNLESS you are doing Inglehart type work, which has dominated the department for a long time (then again, he will probably be retiring soon).

Comparative is wierd because certain departments will be strong in some areas but weak in others. Berkeley used to be a juggernaut in Latin America but isn't anymore. Michigan hasn't had a single Latin Americanist for around a decade I believe whereas it now has two very established SE Asian scholars which is rare.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Comparativist

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

@Comparativist  thank you for the response!  After doing a little more digging, Stanford seems to have faculty that are more in alignment with my research interests in institutional analysis/institutional design (E.g. Barry Weingast, Terry Moe).  Have you applied to any schools yet?

[guest56436]

Last cycle.

[encyclopediabrown]

Hey Cristian, are you interests more specific than American/Comparative and institutions? The programs you mentioned all have strong faculty in the major subfields (as well as people who do institutions). Regardless applying broadly is not a bad strategy.

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

On 8/18/2017 at 6:54 PM, encyclopediabrown said:

Hey Cristian, are you interests more specific than American/Comparative and institutions? The programs you mentioned all have strong faculty in the major subfields (as well as people who do institutions). Regardless applying broadly is not a bad strategy.

I'm not sure if the following is specific enough, but I'm really interested in the new institutional analysis subfield in both the american and comparative fields.  More specifically, I'm interested in discovering which political institutions are the best at encouraging and fostering peaceful exchanges between collective groups of people.  I'm also interested in understanding how american institutions developed over time, and why they developed in the particular way they did.  My interests have been very much influenced by the work of political scientists/economists such as Barry Weingast, Elinor Ostrom, Douglass North, and Gary Cox.  

[encyclopediabrown]

Clearly, then, Stanford would be a good fit! But so would most of the places on your list, which all have people who could chair an institutions-focused dissertation. However, your more substantive interests (e.g. are you interested in ethnic conflict, the U.S. Congress, civil wars, etc) may narrow things down somewhat. 

My two cents: have a trusted advisor look over an early draft of your research statement. And if you can stomach the fees, apply broadly! Even with a sterling record, there's a lot of noise in the admissions process.

[Imperator Totius Hispaniae]

On 8/23/2017 at 8:04 PM, encyclopediabrown said:

Clearly, then, Stanford would be a good fit! But so would most of the places on your list, which all have people who could chair an institutions-focused dissertation. However, your more substantive interests (e.g. are you interested in ethnic conflict, the U.S. Congress, civil wars, etc) may narrow things down somewhat. 

My two cents: have a trusted advisor look over an early draft of your research statement. And if you can stomach the fees, apply broadly! Even with a sterling record, there's a lot of noise in the admissions process.

Thanks for the advice!  My more substantive interests in American politics are U.S. Congress, bureaucratic agencies, the judiciary, and lobbyists.  Comparatively, my interests are in constitutions, democracies, and legislative bodies/actors.  I'm also interested in looking at institutional arrangements in european countries at certain points in history, particularly those in the medieval/renaissance/enlightenment period.  I will definitely have an advisor look at my research statement though.  

Edited August 26, 2017 by Cristian Reyes