Sunday, March 18, 2012 - 4:15 AM
After blogging last week about the gendered effects of a Ph.D. for foreign policy professionals, I got a reasonable query from Caitlin Fitzgerald: if getting a Ph.D. is so great, how does one get accepted into a doctoral program in political science?
This is a good question. Despite all of the warnings being proffered about the stultifying nature of graduate school and the horrible, very-bad, not-so-great quality of the academic job market, competition to get into top-tier grad schools is still quite high. So, how do you get in?
As someone who got accepted into a very competitive Ph.D. program in Boston San Francisco - well, not in San Francisco, but nearby - no, not Santa Clara [OK, that's enough!!--ed.] and as someone who has sat in on more than his fair share of admissions committees, I can proffer some useful tips. I'm going to do this in two parts: first, what undergraduates should do, and then what post-baccalaureate types should do. I'm starting with the undergraduates because it's not too late for them it's at the college level when an individual applicant can lay the necessary groundwork for a strong application.
Before I jump into the five dos and don'ts, let me remind you of something: in good Ph.D. programs, admissions committees are looking for a reason to ding you. The problem is a surfeit, not a dearth, of qualified applicants. By the last stages of the process, admissions committees are often making accept-or-reject decisions on distinctions so minor that no one would admit them publicly (it's not that we want to do this - it's that admissions slots are scarce and looking at minutiae seems fairer than, say, a random draw). What this means is that any serious chink in your admissions armor - low GPA, low GREs, weak recommendations, etc. - gives an admissions committee a valid excuse to ding you. So if you're really interested, you have to make sure that every facet of your application is up to par.
With that out of the way, here are the Five Dos and Five Don'ts for undergraduates applying to Political Science Ph.D. programs in either international relations or comparative politics:
THE FIVE DOS:
1. Read some actual political science. This might sound obvious, but a lot of undergraduate programs in political science -- particularly in the first few years -- will have syllabi larded with weird textbooks and Foreign Affairs articles. And that's OK for undergrads -- but if you're thinking of getting a Ph.D. and you're not terribly familiar with either International Organization or the American Political Science Review, you're in for a world of hurt. Read the journals to get a sense of A) what it's like to write in political sciencese; B) not sound like an idiot when you write your application; and C) Make sure, one last time, that this is really what you want to do for the next six years.
2. Write a thesis. Ph.D. programs want to be sure that you will have the intellectual chops to do real research and real writing. The best opportunity you'll have to do that as an undergrad is your B.A. thesis. If you don't write one and apply to a Ph.D. program, that's a red flag. Why didn't you write one? If you can't handle that, how could you handle a dissertaton? So write a thesis whether it's required or not -- and make sure it's good.
3. Get comfortable with math. Even if you're aspiring to do pure political theory or qualitative work, you're going to have to take classes in methodology, game theory and econometrics in graduate school. Oh, and by the way, with the arrival of Big Data, even areas of research that used to be qualitative are becoming quantitative. The less innumerate you are, the less these courses will seem like a foreign language. At a minimum, make sure you have familiarity with intermediate-level statistics and multivariate calculus. Linear algebra is nice too.
4. Go abroad and learn a language. Experience is not weighted all that heavily in grad school applications. Overseas experience is an exception, particularly if you want to specialize in an area or region of the globe. Learning a language pertinent to that region or area will help as well. Exploit study abroad programs as a way to signal that you'll be up for the rigors of field work.
5. Get rich. Ready for some real-keeping? If you can fund your own ticket for graduate school, the admissions standards are not nearly so high. Whether you inherit family wealth, win an NSF fellowship, or finally make sure that Nigerian e-mailer comes through, having no need for fellowship support makes you a freebie to most programs. At that point, the equation changes from "is this candidate among the best?" to "is this candidate above the bar?" The latter is much easier to clear than the former.
And now.... THE FIVE DON'TS:
1. E-mail professors in Ph.D. programs at length. Your mileage may vary, but speaking personally, I'm at the point where I get so many of these emails that I ignore all of them. All. Of. Them. Why? Because professors are not stupid -- we know you're sending these out en masse, we don't know whether you really have the chops to get a degree, and because we don't make decisions like this because of e-mails. I won't deny that this tactic might work once in a blue moon, but it's been so played out that most profs' eyes glaze over a these missives.
2. Detail, at length, your plans to change the world in your personal statement. The personal statement in a doctoral admissions packet is the easiest way for a candidate to screw up -- it'll be almost as bad as your dissertation prospectus. What admissions committees are looking for are signs of emotional and intellectual maturity matched with an ambition to do first-rate research. They are not looking for "and then I realized" epiphanies about how getting a Ph.D. will allow you to change the world. Backstory matters in explaining why you're interested in doing what you're doing, but don't kid yourself -- unless you're a survivor of an ethnic cleansing, your personal narrative at 21 is just not that interesting. Side note: if you are the survivor of an ethnic cleansing, hey, go to town in your statement.
3. Put all your application eggs into one basket. Let's say you've done everything I've suggested. Let's say you've researched grad schools carefully, and have decided that, given you're research interests, the only person you can work with is Robert Bates at Harvard. Congratulations, you've gone overboard in specializing!! Apply to good programs, not just to work with one person. Individual professors move, retire, pass away, go on sabbatical, or drink too much and hit on students and make things veeeeery awkward in the aftermath. Diversify your portfolio and make sure you apply to programs with a deep bench in your area of interest.
4. Get celebrity professors to write you letters of recommendation. Letters of recommendation matter a lot to this process, and I've noticed a trend among those-savvy-beyond-their-years to make sure they ingratiate themselves with well-known professors as a way of calling attention to one's application. I get this instinct, and done well it can work -- a glowing letter from, say, Madeleine Albright or Zbigniew Brzezinski that indicates deep knowledge about you can be a game-changer. Here's the thing, though -- 99% of the recommendation letters I read from people at this level of fame are bland, impersonal boilerplate. That will hurt you. So don't bend your research interests to match a star professor -- make sure that the profs who know your area well also know you well enough to write good letters of recommendation.
5. Take on debt. Let's say you work really hard and get accepted to a top tier program, but without the fellowship support that you need because -- silly you! -- you're not rich. You night start thinking, "sure, I'll have to take on some debt, but it's a great program and therefore worth it." Wrong! First of all, it's not like you're going to be raking in the bucks as a post-grad -- even a small amount of debt can be financially debilitating. Second, not getting a fellowship is a powerful signal of lukewarm interest on the part of the school, so you'd already be starting with a strike against you. Unless you're rich, only attend traditional Ph.D. programs that offer you full tuition and a stipend.
Oh, and one bonus DON'T:
5*. Talk up your blog or Twitter feed as an example of research. It isn't research, and no one cares anyway.
Part II -- what to do if you've been out of college for a while and want to apply to get a Ph.D. -- will follow this week.
Professors -- am I missing anything? Any more advice to proffer?
These are all solid. I'd just note that they're means to an end—and that they're neither necessary nor sufficient. The ends, in practice, are (1) a really professionalized statement of purpose; (2) rock-star letters from recommenders; and (3) outstanding GREs (I know, they're not reflective of what it takes to make it, but they are a concrete indicator, and they get attention for that reason).
I'd also note that fit in a given program is a big deal. It makes no sense for a program to accept students that it can't train. It's not uncommon for a department to turn away incredibly qualified applicants who want to do something that's not something that they can reasonably support. They'd most likely be either burning an admission slot or adding to their attrition statistics.
My daughter, a freshman, is drawn to Political Science as a major. I think its a disease she caught growing up with a mother in the public service and a stepfather who is a JAG lawyer.
I have told her that she needs to consider her path to a Masters immediately. I, myself, have only a bachelor's and couldn't commit to the rigors of graduate and then post graduate school as a single parent. I have told her that this does lead to career dead ends (which I am working to over come but age will likely mean that a Ph.D. will never be).
Thank you for writing this series, it provides practical advice and I will definitely be sharing it with her.
Part II -- what to do if you've been out of college for a while and want to apply to get a Ph.D. -- will follow this week.
I'm definitely waiting for this one. I've thought about going back to college to do a Masters Program after three years out of school (I have a B.A. in Political Science), but the three-year gap is a bit discouraging. Particularly since I've been working for that whole period.
>"win an NSF fellowship"
Yes, this. A surprising number of aspiring poli-sci students don't seem familiar with the NSF Fellowships, but they are well worth applying for. In addition to free money, since NSFs are well known in physical sciences, poli-sci depts to like to land NSF grad students since it's a nice talking point to skeptical Deans from hard science fields.
Can a big external fellowship lower the bar at a top program? Yes. Can winning one even change what was an initial "reject" to "admit". Without giving any details, yes, it can.
>1) Read poli sci literature; 3) get comfortable with math; 4) foreign language
There's some tradeoff in time invested in 1), 3), 4). What the right balance is will vary by program, but the trend in most places is towards "3) Math".
A recent grad of Dan's alma mater told me that it's common to see new Stanford poli-sci PhD students who were Math or Physics majors who never took a single poli-sci course. Econ majors very common. My friend tells me some profs there would prefer to not even consider poli-sci/IR majors for admission, since by definition they would have had time to take enough math courses
.
Good advice for the most part. You should write a thesis, but you need to write it properly. Your undergrad supervisor will probably tell you this, but the main purpose of it is to have one really good chapter/section you can send out as a writing sample. They may not look at it, (you should send it even if they don't request it) but a good piece of really professional thinking/writing seems to help a lot, so pick your chapter early, and make polishing it to a fine sheen your first task. After sending out your apps you can finish the rest.
As an addendum to "Don't detail, at length, your plans to change the world in your personal statement," here's one thing you should do in your personal statement: indicate that you have some idea of what you're getting yourself into. That means have a research agenda, or at least a question. The question should be realistic, in the sense that it's something an academic political scientist might (a) want to and (b) reasonably be able to answer. You don' t even have to do that research once you're admitted - you can change your dissertation topic several times. But when I'm going through applications it helps - especially among undergrads - to see that an applicant already has a clue about what graduate-level work is all about.
So does this mean that as a non-traditional student getting a BS from an online school that I should give up on a PhD? No thesis, no relationship with professors, and definitely not rich. My blog doesn't count. I get a few points for overseas experience with some language skill. I know a former higher-up in the Interior Dept from the GWB administration, but I'm guessing that isn't quite enough to push me over the top.
The only redemption I see is to quit my job (and hope my wife finds one twice as good as mine), land a spot in a solid traditional Master's program, and hope for the best. Have I got that right?
I hate Mondays.
I don't think we have reached peak yet. But indicators are one that the Unites States are going to our reserves of oil to keep the price down. The price of a barrel is I think around 100 a couple of years ago I think it was close to 110. When oil goes up, gas goes up, when goes up the prices for other things go up ex. food. The price for a gallon of milk has gone up just as much as the price of gas. I hope this helps..
"Is rio orange war always sms illimite inevitable ?"
MaximB
Hey Dan,
Wish I had known all this before asking whether you'd be interested in chairing my committee ; )
But why not emphasize blogging? Especially if one blogs about a specific subject extensively and include book/literature reviews, critical analysis, insightful critiques, etc. An active blog can demonstrate writing ability, research skills, critical analysis, command of the literature, etc. Furthermore, quality blogs are starting to get cited in both peer-reviewed journals and the mainstream media.
So wouldn't one's blog be worth emphasizing, particularly if that is one way to differentiate yourself from other candidates?
Cheers,
Patrick
ps. looking forward to graduation!
Dr. Drezner,
What is taken into consideration and what should deemed "important" by graduate students who jump from a Master's program at one university to a PhD program at another. Are these students frowned upon, how important is the quality of the previous program and its reputation, along with the program's professors?
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(10)
SHOW COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE