What does it take?

[crawdad]

I've applied to 9 schools, have a 3.8 GPA, low 1400s GRE, a bar journal publication, an MPSA presentation, and non-mainstream research interests. My school options are dwindling to the point where I have to seriously consider waiting another year or going into something else altogether. I know that others in the brother/sisterhood of the rejected would be interested in seeing what it took to get accepted. So, an open question: for those of you who have gotten into a top 20 program, what are your stats/qualifications? I'm especially interested in those of you who seem to get into every program you apply to.

[Medievalmaniac]

I've applied to 9 schools, have a 3.8 GPA, low 1400s GRE, a bar journal publication, an MPSA presentation, and non-mainstream research interests. My school options are dwindling to the point where I have to seriously consider waiting another year or going into something else altogether. I know that others in the brother/sisterhood of the rejected would be interested in seeing what it took to get accepted. So, an open question: for those of you who have gotten into a top 20 program, what are your stats/qualifications? I'm especially interested in those of you who seem to get into every program you apply to.

Names in the first half of the alphabet? A birthday in a Zodiac sign compatible with that of potential advisors? SIGH, who knows? What will knowing that about other people change about you as an applicant?

I suggest a glass of wine, some chocolate, and Monty Python, or maybe Ab Fab. That's certainly what I'm going to do this evening!

Until this round of applications is over, I refuse to give in to the crazies - even though have come dangerously close. If I don't get in this year, it's not going to stop me from working to research and publish in the field anyhow. I have a lot of dreams and goals....being in a doctoral program will make achieving them easier for me, because I'll have easier access to the materials I need, especially newer research. But it won't stop me from doing what I do. I hope it won't stop you, either!

Edited February 22, 2010 by Medievalmaniac

[SBL]

Names in the first half of the alphabet? A birthday in a Zodiac sign compatible with that of potential advisors? SIGH, who knows? What will knowing that about other people change about you as an applicant?

To be fair, what it potentially changes (at least in my case) is the decision as to whether to reapply next year. I thought I had pretty competitive stats for some of the places I applied to. But given my likely universal lack of success, any information others can provide will prove a useful gauge through which to measure my competitiveness. This could well help me decide whether the huge investment of time (a 6 month process for me from start to finish this time around), effort (a full-time job in itself outside of my actual full-time job) and money ($3,000 this year) is a worthy investment or merely the visible collateral damage of an ill-pursued pipe dream.

[DJ_CA]

Honestly... I get the feeling that where someone goes to undergrad influences the decisions a lot more than we'd like to think when it comes to some of the top programs. Not only does an elite undergrad program make one's file pop out immediately, but it more than likely gives him or her a personal connection via letter writers, advisers, etc. I think that when the programs are hovering around 5% acceptance rates, there are going to be more than enough applicants with high GRE scores and high GPAs to fill an incoming class, and remember, we're talking about only 3-10 admitted students per subfield in most cases. That's a situation ripe for a glowing rec from an Ivy prof giving one student a huge edge over a student with identical stats from a liberal arts college where the profs aren't as well-known on the national research circuit (so to speak). Just one observation.

And I say this not to take anything away from any Ivy students who were admitted to the top programs, but I just think we should at least acknowledge the potentially huge role one's undergraduate institution may play in this process when we go through a "what does it all mean?" phase. The fact that GradCafe and its multitude of threads about rankings, reputations, and the sorrows of not being admitted to Harvard even exists speaks to the innate elitism of higher academia. I mean, where else are we going to write brilliant theses extolling the virtues of popular democracy?

I didn't mean to hijack your thread, so I'll make it up to you by throwing my stats and info out there... Eventually. I actually think this thread is a good idea in terms of bringing a little bit of transparency to this process and for helping those folks who are planning on reapplying (or reading ahead for first applications for next year), but I think that maybe we should wait on it until everyone has received formal offers in the mail. Maybe I'm overly paranoid, but I don't really want to piss anyone off at my prospective programs just quite yet.

-D

[SBL]

Honestly... I get the feeling that where someone goes to undergrad influences the decisions a lot more than we'd like to think when it comes to some of the top programs. Not only does an elite undergrad program make one's file pop out immediately, but it more than likely gives him or her a personal connection via letter writers, advisers, etc. I think that when the programs are hovering around 5% acceptance rates, there are going to be more than enough applicants with high GRE scores and high GPAs to fill an incoming class, and remember, we're talking about only 3-10 admitted students per subfield in most cases. That's a situation ripe for a glowing rec from an Ivy prof giving one student a huge edge over a student with identical stats from a liberal arts college where the profs aren't as well-known on the national research circuit (so to speak). Just one observation.

Doesn't bode well for us international students then, unless we went to Oxbridge!

[curufinwe]

You are absolutely right, DJ_CA.

And imagine yourself graduating from an international university. I do not even stand a chance against those LAC's in terms of recommenders or the name of the school. So this process has taught me that you can get great grades and be the top of your class, get great GRE scores but you are fighting an uphill battle if your school is not known by the adcomms.

[applying12010]

Doesn't bode well for us international students then, unless we went to Oxbridge!

I am international student, and I didn't go to Oxbridge! (I actually turned down Oxford)

Some of my thoughts:

1) It probably depends on subfield in the first place - I heard that American is usually a little easier to get into. IR is the most difficult.

2) Your fit with the department. The professors are smart and know whether you are just applying because of the name.

3) Quality of undergrad institution matters, but it is not the determining factor. Undergrad quality can partially offset lower GPA, however. My GPA is a tiny bit lower than 3.8 (I went a really hard school and took a lot of hard classes). I think I will be rejected outright if I am coming from a regional state university.

4) Write a good personal statement - show that you are thoughtful, original and know what the field is about. Ask professors for help with your statement. Mine was read by three professors - their comments are extremely helpful.

5) Get good letters by demonstrating your aptitude as a political scientists - one of my letter writer invited me to co-author a paper, and the other asked me to develop a syllabus for a high-level seminar with him.

6) Good GRE scores - I think a 1500 combined is necessary, according to what I know. The cutting off point for top programs can be pretty high. I memorized 6-7000 words for the verbal section to get a top score...It is more difficult for me since my native language is not English.

[curufinwe]

I am international student, and I didn't go to Oxbridge! (I actually turned down Oxford)

Some of my thoughts:

1) It probably depends on subfield in the first place - I heard that American is usually a little easier to get into. IR is the most difficult.

2) Your fit with the department. The professors are smart and know whether you are just applying because of the name.

3) Quality of undergrad institution matters, but it is not the determining factor. Undergrad quality can partially offset lower GPA, however. My GPA is a tiny bit lower than 3.8 (I went a really hard school and took a lot of hard classes). I think I will be rejected outright if I am coming from a regional state university.

4) Write a good personal statement - show that you are thoughtful, original and know what the field is about. Ask professors for help with your statement. Mine was read by three professors - their comments are extremely helpful.

5) Get good letters by demonstrating your aptitude as a political scientists - one of my letter writer invited me to co-author a paper, and the other asked me to develop a syllabus for a high-level seminar with him.

6) Good GRE scores - I think a 1500 combined is necessary, according to what I know. The cutting off point for top programs can be pretty high. I memorized 6-7000 words for the verbal section to get a top score...It is more difficult for me since my native language is not English.

Was your undergrad institution in the US? or somewhere else in the world?

[applying12010]

Was your undergrad institution in the US? or somewhere else in the world?

Swarthmore.

[SBL]

Sorry, I meant international students coming from international schools - i.e. places that adcomms will have never heard of no matter how good they may be in their respective countries.

[yellowshoes]

I second all that's been said about undergrads, although maybe not the part about international schools... schools like to get kids from all over the world.

A point about statements. Yes get people to read it, but if your profs aren't reading them yearly (if your school doesn't have a grad program) then get someone who knows what to look for read them. My profs all liked my staement, but I have recently learned how far from good it actually is. They didn't have bad intentions, they have simply forgotten what goes into a good one.

As for my stats: 4.0 GPA and 1400 GREs. No luck so far and only a couple left.

[Scalia]

Honestly... I get the feeling that where someone goes to undergrad influences the decisions a lot more than we'd like to think when it comes to some of the top programs. Not only does an elite undergrad program make one's file pop out immediately, but it more than likely gives him or her a personal connection via letter writers, advisers, etc. I think that when the programs are hovering around 5% acceptance rates, there are going to be more than enough applicants with high GRE scores and high GPAs to fill an incoming class, and remember, we're talking about only 3-10 admitted students per subfield in most cases. That's a situation ripe for a glowing rec from an Ivy prof giving one student a huge edge over a student with identical stats from a liberal arts college where the profs aren't as well-known on the national research circuit (so to speak). Just one observation.

And I say this not to take anything away from any Ivy students who were admitted to the top programs, but I just think we should at least acknowledge the potentially huge role one's undergraduate institution may play in this process when we go through a "what does it all mean?" phase. The fact that GradCafe and its multitude of threads about rankings, reputations, and the sorrows of not being admitted to Harvard even exists speaks to the innate elitism of higher academia. I mean, where else are we going to write brilliant theses extolling the virtues of popular democracy?

I didn't mean to hijack your thread, so I'll make it up to you by throwing my stats and info out there... Eventually. I actually think this thread is a good idea in terms of bringing a little bit of transparency to this process and for helping those folks who are planning on reapplying (or reading ahead for first applications for next year), but I think that maybe we should wait on it until everyone has received formal offers in the mail. Maybe I'm overly paranoid, but I don't really want to piss anyone off at my prospective programs just quite yet.

-D

I'm going to be one of those students with a less than stellar school on my app. Although I go to a mid sized state school, there isn't really anything that I can do at this point right? I can't transfer to an elite school as a senior, but I might consider it if I decide to spend two more years in undergrad. The way that I look at it is that all I can do is legitimize my GPA through acing the GRE. What does concern me is yellowshoes' lack of success up to this point.

[natofone]

I'm guessing that the folks with very high GPAs and very high GREs without luck so far have applied to only the top programs?

[yellowshoes]

I'm guessing that the folks with very high GPAs and very high GREs without luck so far have applied to only the top programs?

No, unfortunately. Several of mine are low ranked and I didn't even touch anything higher than 13.

Edited February 23, 2010 by yellowshoes

[yellowshoes]

I'm going to be one of those students with a less than stellar school on my app. Although I go to a mid sized state school, there isn't really anything that I can do at this point right? I can't transfer to an elite school as a senior, but I might consider it if I decide to spend two more years in undergrad. The way that I look at it is that all I can do is legitimize my GPA through acing the GRE. What does concern me is yellowshoes' lack of success up to this point.

I wouldn't encourage you to give up, just know what you are getting in to. Have people who know what to look for read your statement if at all possible. I really don't know what else could be my problem as its not GPA, GRE, stength of letters (akthough from less known profs, which I can't help), etc. Unless its undergrad, which also can't be helped now. The statement is the only thing I can mess with at this point.

Edited February 23, 2010 by yellowshoes

[DJ_CA]

I'm going to be one of those students with a less than stellar school on my app. Although I go to a mid sized state school, there isn't really anything that I can do at this point right? I can't transfer to an elite school as a senior, but I might consider it if I decide to spend two more years in undergrad. The way that I look at it is that all I can do is legitimize my GPA through acing the GRE. What does concern me is yellowshoes' lack of success up to this point.

From what I've experienced personally and heard secondhand, "acing" the GRE will be more important at some places than others. Just as a point of reference, my combined GRE score was 230 points higher than the average listed by one of my "deafening silence" schools, so the GRE certainly isn't the end-all/be-all.

One piece of advice I'd give you that may be even more important is to take a full and robust course load your senior year. I'm a few years out of undergrad, and I really wish that I hadn't cashed in all my AP exam credits to spend my senior year playing lots of ultimate frisbee, holding an inordinate number of band practices, and having plenty of time to obsess over my comps. Take a few upper division courses from different subfields than your own, do an independent study to prepare undergraduate research to submit to a conference, complete an impressive minor, take some methods and math classes (I know, maybe I went a bit overboard with that one)... Something like that that to prove to the adcomms that you're a serious academic. Believe me, you have no idea how much I envy your situation of still being able to affect your undergraduate career. Not in the sense that I'm unhappy with my options for next year, but in that I worried constantly throughout the application process about my "getting drunk in Astronomy 101"-themed senior year. (Still got an A in there!) All hyperbole about my undergraduate escapades aside, I do honestly feel that if I had done any of of the things I'm suggesting to you, I would have been a significantly better candidate to the top departments and probably would have been admitted to more of them.

Also, and I cringe at even typing this, because I hate that this is a legitimate part of the application process... Do contact a few professors-of-interest at various schools. It might be something that helps you in the way that a rec from an academic superstar helps another applicant. Contact early so that it doesn't appear to be outward academic prostitution, even though it is. Read something of their research first!

Finally, as I've said before: The best piece of advice I received from a professor was to find large departments, particularly from big, public universities. Your chance of being admitted there may in fact be better than at lesser-reputed, smaller programs.

Good luck! (And like I said, I'm more than willing to share the particulars of my own info once official offers come in the mail.)

[Bobb Cobb]

My advice is for those considering reapplying. First, don't give up. I think everything that has been said so far is true, but I have a bit more to add. My GREs are probably amongst the lowest on the board, and while I was not admitted to any top programs (this year or last), I have had some success (TAMU, Georgia, Florida, UNT, UWM, Mississippi, Oklahoma and more down the line). Of these, TAMU is the most competitive and demanding in terms of GRE scores, but the first three are not easy to get into.

I went to a below 4th tier state school in the south, but I made the most of it. I think that, along with visiting departments before I applied, made the biggest difference. My LORs are from no-names, I mean no names at all, but they are all Political Scientists with decent publication records. I was also able to wrestle 5, and they all were very detailed in their thoughts on my ability to succeed in an advanced program. Many letters say great student, made A's, etc., but the key is having them say that you are a student who is better than the rest where you are and that they unequivocally believe that you will flourish in the PhD program.

Next comes the personal statement. In this you have to be clear about why you want to be at that program. I am talking much more than stuff like "great reputation", "great mentors", etc. I am talking you need to know what they can offer you and what you offer them. Students with high GPAs, top GREs, and good pedigrees are a dime a dozen.

Then there is the writing sample. Do a writing sample that is PhD, journal/conference quality. While some say that the WS does not matter, I say why take the chance with a steaming pile of dookie? Do a quality WS using advanced methods, and it will likely get someone's attention. Use this asa chance to explain why you are different than the other applicants. Perhaps the "handicap" of a low tier school or international degree may work in your favor if you spin it the right way. No department wants a cookie-cutter mold for a cohort.

Take some advanced courses in the off season and also submit a paper to a conference or even a journal. Just showing that you are attempting to get involved in the discipline shows that you are at least that serious about this thing.

Last, get to know the people in the department. If you are set on reapplying at the same places, then contact the DGS and ask what you could do to improve your application, and if it would be reconsidered next time. Also, consider other places. No matter which place, get to know someone there. It speaks volumes to have an ally/allies on the adcomm. I suggest visiting the department in early/mid-fall. If they set up a schedule for you, then you know that they are at least happy about considering you. If not, screw them and try somewhere else. You do not want to deal with people that act like they are too busy for you.

What went wrong? Who knows? I suspect that if you had high GPAs/GREs then you must not have clearly conveyed why you want to get a PhD and why it needs to be in the department in which you are applying. Again, there are always going to be plenty of high GRE/GPA/Pedigrees so you have to set yourself apart in some other way. Some people may say that I am wrong and that those things are the only things that matter, forget them and keep trying. Most importantly, be original and make yourself wanted in ways that others never think of. I certainly wish everyone the best, and I know what is like to not get into places that you had your heart set on. Keep your heads up, and show them that they missed out by becoming the next best thing, albeit a year later.

[crawdad]

My advice is for those considering reapplying. First, don't give up. I think everything that has been said so far is true, but I have a bit more to add. My GREs are probably amongst the lowest on the board, and while I was not admitted to any top programs (this year or last), I have had some success (TAMU, Georgia, Florida, UNT, UWM, Mississippi, Oklahoma and more down the line). Of these, TAMU is the most competitive and demanding in terms of GRE scores, but the first three are not easy to get into.

I went to a below 4th tier state school in the south, but I made the most of it. I think that, along with visiting departments before I applied, made the biggest difference. My LORs are from no-names, I mean no names at all, but they are all Political Scientists with decent publication records. I was also able to wrestle 5, and they all were very detailed in their thoughts on my ability to succeed in an advanced program. Many letters say great student, made A's, etc., but the key is having them say that you are a student who is better than the rest where you are and that they unequivocally believe that you will flourish in the PhD program.

Next comes the personal statement. In this you have to be clear about why you want to be at that program. I am talking much more than stuff like "great reputation", "great mentors", etc. I am talking you need to know what they can offer you and what you offer them. Students with high GPAs, top GREs, and good pedigrees are a dime a dozen.

Then there is the writing sample. Do a writing sample that is PhD, journal/conference quality. While some say that the WS does not matter, I say why take the chance with a steaming pile of dookie? Do a quality WS using advanced methods, and it will likely get someone's attention. Use this asa chance to explain why you are different than the other applicants. Perhaps the "handicap" of a low tier school or international degree may work in your favor if you spin it the right way. No department wants a cookie-cutter mold for a cohort.

Take some advanced courses in the off season and also submit a paper to a conference or even a journal. Just showing that you are attempting to get involved in the discipline shows that you are at least that serious about this thing.

Last, get to know the people in the department. If you are set on reapplying at the same places, then contact the DGS and ask what you could do to improve your application, and if it would be reconsidered next time. Also, consider other places. No matter which place, get to know someone there. It speaks volumes to have an ally/allies on the adcomm. I suggest visiting the department in early/mid-fall. If they set up a schedule for you, then you know that they are at least happy about considering you. If not, screw them and try somewhere else. You do not want to deal with people that act like they are too busy for you.

What went wrong? Who knows? I suspect that if you had high GPAs/GREs then you must not have clearly conveyed why you want to get a PhD and why it needs to be in the department in which you are applying. Again, there are always going to be plenty of high GRE/GPA/Pedigrees so you have to set yourself apart in some other way. Some people may say that I am wrong and that those things are the only things that matter, forget them and keep trying. Most importantly, be original and make yourself wanted in ways that others never think of. I certainly wish everyone the best, and I know what is like to not get into places that you had your heart set on. Keep your heads up, and show them that they missed out by becoming the next best thing, albeit a year later.

[Midwestern]

I've had two go-rounds (with much greater success in round two) but take any advice it for what it is worth:

1. Your SOP matters. Programs don't want to accept people who don't know what the PhD lifestyle is and who are therefore more likely to drop out (a wasted investment). Your SOP should clearly indicate that you're aware of what the PhD lifestyle is and that you're committed to it and a career in academia (at some point). The school gets a boost in ranking based on how well they place applicants as well, so you eventually teaching at a univ. is music to their ears....

2. Be clear what your research question (for now) is. Be clear that you have researched the faculty and know that this particular program is a good fit for you. If your topic is not mainstream, make sure you're careful in your wording to not sound too far "out there." I emailed faculty at the schools before applying to make sure my non-mainstream topic would work, and was able to establish some good contacts (which served well in terms of admissions in a few of the cases).

3. Your GRE score is great. I'm not sure what part of that score is your Quant, but make sure your Quant is 700+.

4. Your rec. letters should ideally be from big timers, but if not (mine totally weren't), they do need to glow with praise and assurance that they're confident you'll FINISH and do well in the program.

5. Have taken at least one quant class and make sure your writing sample is more than a lit review.

6. You can contact departments once the application season is over (May) and ask them why you were rejected. Some will respond with helpful pointers.

That's my .02. My first go-round I made lots of strategic blunders and was only admitted to MAs. My second go-round I was admitted to a handful of great PhD programs. Needless to say, I was the same person both times. Apparently strategy matters with these things.

Good luck!

[crawdad]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate the info. I also forgot to mention that (despite it having been read by five professors), my statement of purpose had a typo (in case you're wondering, it's Eastern European, not eastern European).

I come from an okay ranked private religious school; it's nothing special. I'll probably load up on impressive sounding classes for one more undergraduate year then try again this winter.

Once more into the breach, dear friends...

[ladedodaday]

I have been fairly lucky with admissions and got into a number of excellent schools (3 in the top 10 and another two in the top 25) so here are my little slices of wisdom:

1- Undergrad isn't everything. I went to a socially fantastic, but not highly reputable public university with no graduate political science program. It comes in somewhere around 100 on the USNWR university ranking. You don't have to go to Harvard to get into Princeton. Unfortunately, this comes with a huge caveat: if you are coming from a lesser known school, you are fighting brutal odds at many programs.

2- Your professors are your best resource. Find young professors in your department who (hopefully) went to schools you are considering and pick their brains. Give your personal statement to anyone who will read it (even professors you never had for class). Do a thesis and develop strong relationships. Ask your adviser to get in touch with people they know at other schools; their network can be yours!

3- Small GRE differences don't matter. The general cutoffs seem to be 600+ (Most of the top 50ish) and 700+ (Top 5). If you get over 700 on both sections, and at least a 5 on the writing, you will be fine almost anywhere.

4- Fit does matter. It is a nebulous concept, but in my acceptances they always emphasized my "fit" within their program. Conversely, I know why I wasn't a good fit at the schools that rejected me.

5- Write a fantastic, professional personal statement. Explain your background, prove that you understand political science, and tell them why their program is a great fit for you. You don't need an elaborate, original research plan to get into a school.

6- Don't apologize for anything in your application.

7- Just because a school is lower ranked doesn't mean it's easier to get into (and vice versa). Schools like Vanderbilt/Notre Dame/Brown (and apparently BC, judging by the incredibly depressing thread on this board) are incredibly difficult to get into. They often have higher average GRE scores and lower acceptance rates than top 10 programs! When picking the schools you apply to, make sure there is a real range unless you are a poli sci rockstar.

8- There are lots of great schools and great scholars outside the schools that are obsessed about here. For example, in my subfield: Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Colorado, and UNM are fantastic programs with many of the field's leading scholars. It seems that for methods people, TAMU, Florida St., and UNT are the same way.

Edited February 23, 2010 by polisciFTW

[fromark17]

Everything Midwestern said is spot-on, but I wanted to add a couple things from my own experience.

I've often heard the argument that undergraduate institution matters a lot, but that doesn't seem to have affected my prospects (though I can see how it would get your file looked at more closely). I went to large state school that doesn't have a political science graduate program and is frankly not very strong in social science in general. My GREs were middling at 1400 with 5.0 AW, though my GPA was pretty high (4.0 for my major and 3.9 overall).

I think what helped me the most were my LORs and a strong statement. I spent 2-3 months working on my statement and tried to tailor it at least somewhat to each school I applied to. I used it as an opportunity to demonstrate my research experience and show how my undergrad work prepared me to take on the rigors of grad school. I only talked briefly (1 paragraph) about my future interests. I also worked on research with 2 profs and they both wrote me great letters (the other letter was from a history professor, which doesn't seem to have worked against me). I think the main thing is to show that you have the capacity to do research and produce original scholarship and know what you're getting into with a 5+ year Ph.D. program. Getting professors to vouch for you on this front is crucial.

The one thing I have learned from the process is that fit matters much more than I thought (or some people on this board seem to mention). The few schools I thought I had a shot at but didn't get into were not the best fit, and a couple others I'm convinced I was admitted to because my interests match the faculty's.

[curufinwe]

Does it really matter when your undergrad institution has or doesn't have a graduate program? I mean, I am currently in an MA program, possibly the best in my country with a 3.71 GPA (and trust me, my professors admit they are stingy with grades compared to the US) and an undergrad degree from another awesome school in my country with a 3.93 GPA (valedictorian) at which I studied on full scholarship for 4 years and an almost-1500 GRE. I did not apply to a school if there were less than 3 professors who were interested in my area of interest.

In my SoP, one paragraph for my past scholarships and my fluency in English (117 TOEFL iBT) and my exchange year in the US, one paragraph on the calculus-statistics-research methods-formal modeling courses I took (business major, so I was involved in numbers), one paragraph on my area of interest, one paragraph on how much I want to be in the academia and teach and do research, and one paragraph on how the school is a good fit.

My writing sample was a paper accepted to a conference in Budapest, got an A for the class I wrote for, and my professor said that topic could easily be researched for a thesis and that it was insightful.

And no acceptances. Yes, Columbia was a long shot and it is in my list because my professors said "you never know" (sometimes you do!). But my other rejections leave me no chance to go to a school that 'The Realist' would say "you 'might' get a TT job".

I absolutely see no points in my profile I can improve other than shooting lightning out of my... uh, never mind.

Edited February 23, 2010 by curufinwe

[curufinwe]

...

Edited February 23, 2010 by curufinwe

[rc47]

Two key points that I think really helped my application a lot:

1. Get some young professors to write your recs. Some of their friends may be on the adcoms. If you're a Sophomore or Junior in college right now, get to know your younger professors really well and do whatever it takes to impress them.

2. Try to be a little humble in your personal statement. You want them to know that you believe you can make a great contribution to the literature, but also show that you have a lot of respect for the scholars who came before you.