What does it take?

[Midwestern]

Hmm. Well, if you want to post your SOP, I'd be happy to add my .02 (as I bet others on this board would). I suppose that's the most concrete way we could possibly be of some help.

[natofone]

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

Much of this boils down to "fit" and luck so you need to apply widely. If you ran out of schools that you would be happy going to, then the main problem is that you didn't apply to enough places that you'd be happy with. Columbia is a top 10 program. NYU and Northwestern aren't top 10, but they are both incredibly selective programs that you can't expect to get into because they take so few students.

I think that it is very likely that you'll get into a few of your remaining programs, but if you aren't happy with them you can always apply again next year and apply to more schools.

[The Realist]

Lots of good thoughts here. Most of them seem right from my perspective. Let me just reiterate a couple points:

1. Really, where you did your undergraduate does not matter nearly as much as how well you did while you were there. I look recent cohorts at the top-10 program where I did my PhD and I see about 25% Ivy League, 30-40% international (meaning schools in China and Turkey and South Africa that most of you probably haven't heard of, not Oxbridge), and the rest a random assortment ranging from Cal States to random little private schools.
2. Killer recs are phenomenally important. Your professors know you better than some random standardized test or your transcript does. I'd say that they normally are what helps us to decide between two otherwise equal candidates. And I can assure you that in the choice between a kid with a 3.8 at Harvard and a kid with a 3.8 at Western Michigan, we're going to go with the one who has the better letters. Trust me.
3. The personal statement does not have to be a dissertation proposal, but it should be able to convince us that you can communicate well, that you have a passion for research, and that you understand the discipline of American political science. Put some real thought into it and get lots of feedback.

[politicalscienceguy]

I applied to a lot of places (and have withdrawn from 4 or 5 that aren't even listed on my sig) because I was told that the admissions process is very capricious, and a lot of luck is involved. Guess I've been pretty lucky. I went to a strong liberal arts college in the US, had a 4.0, and a couple of very strong letters from younger professors who have a lot of connections. Although many have said that the precise GRE doesn't matter as long as it is good, there's something about a 1600 (my score) that brings you to the top of the pack---I completely agree that this is ridiculous and unfair.

But if you look at the acceptances, a lot of people have been accepted to quite a few places, and they will all be turning down all but one. So lots of slots will open up. I do hope that those with a lot of acceptances will decline offers as soon as possible....I will do so for all but a few very soon. Best of luck.

[yellowshoes]

Lots of good thoughts here. Most of them seem right from my perspective. Let me just reiterate a couple points:

1. Really, where you did your undergraduate does not matter nearly as much as how well you did while you were there. I look recent cohorts at the top-10 program where I did my PhD and I see about 25% Ivy League, 30-40% international (meaning schools in China and Turkey and South Africa that most of you probably haven't heard of, not Oxbridge), and the rest a random assortment ranging from Cal States to random little private schools.
2. Killer recs are phenomenally important. Your professors know you better than some random standardized test or your transcript does. I'd say that they normally are what helps us to decide between two otherwise equal candidates. And I can assure you that in the choice between a kid with a 3.8 at Harvard and a kid with a 3.8 at Western Michigan, we're going to go with the one who has the better letters. Trust me.
3. The personal statement does not have to be a dissertation proposal, but it should be able to convince us that you can communicate well, that you have a passion for research, and that you understand the discipline of American political science. Put some real thought into it and get lots of feedback.

I think you make some valid points.

I find the information you looked up about your old program interesting, particularly that 30-40% come from international schools. I suspected there were several, but that is quite a lot. So roughly 35-45% come from non-Ivy/non-international schools. I'm not sure I would consider Cal Tech to be a "random" school as we've all heard of it, and I think everyone is aware that (even small) private schools usually fair well. I think what is more interesting (and perhaps more relevant to those of us who have been voicing concerns about the importance of undergrad) is the percent of students coming from small state schools. This wouldn't be schools like the University of X, X State University, or even (in some cases) Northern X University (I'm thinking of Northern Illinois which people have heard of), but schools like University of X at (insert random, small location...this obviously doesn't apply to the extensive California system). Seeing how many students come from these sorts of schools (state ones that we've never heard of) would be worthwile.

To your second point, would you not agree that more often than not both kids (the one from Harvard and from Western Michigan) with the 3.8 will have excellent recs? Who would the school pick in that, more likely, case? I would think that in most cases kids would have similar GREs, GPAs, support in recs, etc. In the event that they didn't, however, I agree that the school would be less likely to pick based on undergrad. But when all else is roughly equal, who could blame them?

[curufinwe]

I am curious. What happens if you have two similar candidates with good references, but you know the recommenders of one candidate from the US job market and whatnot, but unfamiliar with the other one's recommenders?

[The Realist]

On 2/23/2010 at 8:03 PM, yellowshoes said:

I think you make some valid points.

I find the information you looked up about your old program interesting, particularly that 30-40% come from international schools. I suspected there were several, but that is quite a lot. So roughly 35-45% come from non-Ivy/non-international schools. I'm not sure I would consider Cal Tech to be a "random" school as we've all heard of it, and I think everyone is aware that (even small) private schools usually fair well. I think what is more interesting (and perhaps more relevant to those of us who have been voicing concerns about the importance of undergrad) is the percent of students coming from small state schools. This wouldn't be schools like the University of X, X State University, or even (in some cases) Northern X University (I'm thinking of Northern Illinois which people have heard of), but schools like University of X at (insert random, small location...this obviously doesn't apply to the extensive California system). Seeing how many students come from these sorts of schools (state ones that we've never heard of) would be worthwile.

To your second point, would you not agree that more often than not both kids (the one from Harvard and from Western Michigan) with the 3.8 will have excellent recs? Who would the school pick in that, more likely, case? I would think that in most cases kids would have similar GREs, GPAs, support in recs, etc. In the event that they didn't, however, I agree that the school would be less likely to pick based on undergrad. But when all else is roughly equal, who could blame them?

Sure, there are some students from great non-Ivy American schools (CalTech, MIT, Michigan, UVA, Berkeley), but this does not make up all of the balance. Without divulging too much information I can tell you that the cohort ahead of me had someone who did undergrad at Truman State and another from Cal U. I also think that I was overestimating the percentage who went to Ivy League schools. It was probably closer to 10-15%. I mistakenly count schools like MIT and Stanford and Chicago as Ivy even though I know that they are not.

To answer your second question, no. Letters vary tremendously. Just because you have good grades does not mean that you have fantastic letters. When I read a good-but-not-glowing recommendation written for someone who went to Princeton it goes into the preliminary reject pile. When you letter writer says "I've taught at Random State U for 25 years and this is one of the three best students I've ever taught and the other two went on to succeed at PhD programs at X and Y university" then I notice.

Now, you then asked about two students who were exactly the same but one went to Harvard and the other went to Western Michigan. That counterfactual never comes up. Lots of times we get students with similar grades and GRE scores, but the letters and writing samples and personal statements are always different enough for us to distinguish.

[The Realist]

I am curious. What happens if you have two similar candidates with good references, but you know the recommenders of one candidate from the US job market and whatnot, but unfamiliar with the other one's recommenders?

I've never heard of 99% of American political scientists. The vast majority of letters I read are from Americans whom I've never met. Don't worry about being a foreign student whose letter writers are unfamiliar to us.

[yellowshoes]

Sure, there are some students from great non-Ivy American schools (CalTech, MIT, Michigan, UVA, Berkeley), but this does not make up all of the balance. Without divulging too much information I can tell you that the cohort ahead of me had someone who did undergrad at Truman State and another from California University of Pennsylvania. I also think that I was overestimating the percentage who went to Ivy League schools. It was probably closer to 10-15%. I mistakenly count schools like MIT and Stanford and Chicago as Ivy even though I know that they are not.

To answer your second question, no. Letters vary tremendously. Just because you have good grades does not mean that you have fantastic letters. When I read a good-but-not-glowing recommendation written for someone who went to Princeton it goes into the preliminary reject pile. When you letter writer says "I've taught at Random State U for 25 years and this is one of the three best students I've ever taught and the other two went on to succeed at PhD programs at X and Y university" then I notice.

Now, you then asked about two students who were exactly the same but one went to Harvard and the other went to Western Michigan. That counterfactual never comes up. Lots of times we get students with similar grades and GRE scores, but the letters and writing samples and personal statements are always different enough for us to distinguish.

Thanks for clarifying!

[curufinwe]

Oh, we forgot the most important component. Luck