<p>How does Vanderbilt's political science department compare to top departments around the nation such as georgetown, Tufts, GWU, Columbia, Cornell University, Duke University, Emory, University of Chicago, NYU. These aren't the top top, but they are great school with what I believe, from research, are strong programs. How does Vandy compare? All I really want to know is if it is a well respected political science department?
Thanks.</p>
<p>It appears well respected to me…same league as Emory and Tufts. The others are harder to get into than Vanderbilt but some like GWU and Columbia lack some funding whereas Vanderbilt I believe gives to everyone. I am applying to Emory and Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>Vandy is one of the harder schools to get into. It would fall somewhere behind UChicago, Columbia, and Duke, and maybe Georgetown (and Cornell I guess, though its admit rate is deceitful as their stats are about the same as Vandy and us). It’s in about the middle of those. You have a much greater chance getting in at Emory (I think at least, that’s what the admit rate says. It’s good that this place is still accessible for qualified students) for example, where there has been less pressure for the admit rate to go down. I’m thinking that Vandy’s political science program is respected, but I think we and some of the others may still have an edge for w/e reasons (honestly the course selection/requirements are almost identical between the two of us. We, however, have a more extensive international politics department than Vandy). Also, be warned, our political science dept. is a tad bit more stringent than the one at Vandy I think. It seems that they make it difficult to apply AP credit toward the major (like for comparative, you have to provide a syllabus for it to even be considered. But I guess the same goes for history courses), not much transfer credit is accepted either. Also, they make sure you don’t take many 100 level courses (limited to 4/10 required for major). Other than this, the faculty makes it worth it. Even as a science major, I’m willing to vouch for the political science dept (taken many of my GERs in it, history, and religion, all which are excellent). here. It’s really good (or at least the teaching is).<br>
Don’t know much about Vandy, but please don’t think it’s easier to get into. There are more “accessible”(I’ve started to look at extreme selectivity as unnecessary. Why not admit 20-25% of extremely qualified applicants, as opposed to 5-15%. It’s what UChicago, us, Northwestern, and Rice does. Johns Hopkins also doesn’t necessarily decrease each year, even if they have a larger app. pool) programs and schools on that list that are just as good if not a tad better.
Also, I think I would maybe put Tufts ahead of us. Tufts’ quality is enhanced by the fact that it is a more politically active campus in general (Emory is very hippy like and has protests and activism, but it’s often grassroot issues. Although often you’ll see showdowns between the Muslims and Jews on campus regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict. You won’t see students protesting the war in Afghanistan. Instead, you’ll see like workers’ rights protests and stuff)</p>
<p>lol emory fanboy. Vanderbilt only has a certain number of spots on the commons. They have a cap on how many people they can possibly accept. The admit rate depends on how many people apply, but it’s nice how you spin it.</p>
<p>Every school has a limit on how many it can accept. I’m just saying that other places have higher admit rates (not just Emory, but other places) that get more than a good share of applicants. Again, the other places I mention accept a higher percentile and have solid students. Also, I cited how JHU actually had years where the admit rate increased despite rising application numbers. I don’t agree with explaining that away with: “Well, they had more room that year, but not the next”. JHU is similar to ours, it actually fluctuates regardless.
And actually, as much as I like Emory, I actually like places like Georgia Tech and the engineering schools a little more in terms of student culture. </p>
<p>I think Vandy is awesome, but that doesn’t make it as accessible as some peers. It seems as if it simply choosing to admit less students (not even percent wise, but numerically). The admit rate has dropped sharper than what could be explained away by “rapidly increasing app. numbers”, which you have, but so do many other peers. For example, Duke still has it (as increasing app. numbers and really good applicants at that), and yet Vandy’s admit rate is catching up to theirs very quickly and is lower than schools higher ranked than it is(while the HS stats. haven’t caught them as good as they are, a bit better than ours, except the ACTs). Go figure. If what you say is right, then Vandy must have knocked down many of its freshmen dorms and replaced all of them with the Commons. We essentially have done the same by building new freshmen dorms and converting some older ones into sophomore dorms, yet we still admit the same amount as in previous years (okay, I lie, we admitted less than last year because we’re getting desperate for some reason. Either way, our rate was still like 26%, more than doable. And honestly it wasn’t a sharp decline either. It could basically be explained by the rebound in apps. As the last time we had more than 17k, it was about 26.6%).<br>
I am not lying when I say, the OP and the other person do indeed have a better chance of getting into some of the other schools on that list and that the polisci programs are equal or better to Vandy’s or ours for that matter (I know, and am willing to admit, as much of a fan as I am, that many of those other schools are better for polisci, even though ours is pretty solid. I even cite how strict the program is in some contexts. It certainly isn’t for the one that wants more flexibility).<br>
Vandy is not easier to get into. Period. Mainly because it is in the phase where it is successfully taking risks on its yield and decreasing the “number” of students admitted. This partially explains the decline in admit rate. “The app. numbers are increasing” doesn’t explain it all. This is great for Vandy’s rank (y’all don’t want to end up like us w/a decline for 2 years straight, and thus a slight decline in the rankings), but not for students applying. It makes it much less predictable. The other person said Vandy is easier to get into than the rest, I say it isn’t, and I can’t say if it’s necessarily for the best of reasons.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, let me correct myself, I lied. Despite admitting 25.9% with the application number rebound, that is still more students than last year where the app. numbers declined again (by 1 applicant lol). So, there’s an example where we admit more students w/higher app. numbers. Vandy admitted 80 less than the previous year despite almost a 3K increase in apps. They could’ve admitted the same amount and decreased the admit rate. Proves Vandy is getting extremely hard to get into. Did they admit less because they decided to knock out a hallway of the Commons, which is apparently complete? lol</p>
<p>From what I understand, the commons makes it easier for transfers. I’m not sure if that’s still true though:
[Transfer</a> student numbers on the rise | InsideVandy](<a href=“Inside Vandy: Vanderbilt University's student news source”>Inside Vandy: Vanderbilt University's student news source)</p>
<p>Yeah, I think both Emory and Vandy allow in a reasonable amount of transfers. However, doesn’t the Commons only house freshmen? Do y’all get lots of freshmen spring transfers? We normally get ours sophomore year, where there are lots of reasonable options, or at least huge (as in can fit lots of sophomores) options. We have about the same admit rate for transfers at about 40ish (we are something like 38-40%) right? We’ve been targeting them. Now we have a conditional transfer program for some people on the wait list who are invited. My guess is that the admission pattern differences result from differing goals of the institutions. We’re being greedy, and you guys are trying to get your rank up lol. I think we’re trying on the latter part, but not that hard. If anything, we are just trying to get the app. numbers to stabilize and grow. Emory also lies a lot. It keeps reporting that class of 2015 is our largest applicant pool in Emory’s history and I know for a fact that my class had 500 or so more applicants. At least y’all don’t have to really resort to lying (I don’t know why we did that, I guess we’re trying to make the prospective students feel good as being admitted).</p>
<p>Also: The article kind of suggests an anti-transfer culture at Vandy. Is that to any extent true? Here, they kind of just blend in, and no one really cares until they tell that they are a transfer, in which case someone asks: “From where”. And then even after that, no one cares. Either way, none would feel discriminated against as there simply isn’t much of a social hierarchy here outside of say, racial boundaries. Lower standards or not, they seem to do just as well as we do and that’s all that matters, that they can do the work (at least to me). We also have Oxford, and they can do the work. Perhaps having Oxford gets us used to the idea of transfer students (though there is a slight anti-Oxford sentiment. I don’t get why. Their curriculum at Oxford is probably better/more innovative than the one here. Things may actually get worse for them once they get to Emory, except their grades).</p>
<p>Is Vanderbilt’s political science department well respected? My S, a rising junior, began his freshman year all about economics. After taking several political science classes, he is now double majoring in economics and political science. Economics classes tend to be less than scintillating; there’s just so much a professor can do with those charts and graphs. My other S, a Centre graduate in financial economics, concurs. My Vandy S says the poli sci classes keep him going; that is, he looks forward to going to them. This past school year he was inspired by Roy Neel and John Geer’s class Political Campaigns and the Election Process. They are both wonderful lecturers and have solid credentials. Roy Neel was Al Gore’s chief of staff and the campaign manager for Howard Dean. John Geer, a Distinguished Professor, is a leading researcher on attack ads and is often seen as a political commentator on television. Both men know famous pols and bring them into the classroom. They are great lecturers and know how to get the trending politicians as guest speakers, but a TA grades tests and papers. My S took Bruce Oppenheimer for two classes: The Legislative Process and Political Parties. He loved Oppenheimer, a former Brookings Institution Fellow, who has won awards for his writing and teaching. BTW, my S’s summer internship boss told him Oppenheimer wrote him a “glowing” recommendation. (Many parents on CC can attest to the meaningful recommendations the faculty at Vandy write for students.) Oppenheimer shares grading duties with a TA. For his First Year Writing Seminar, he had Mark Dalhouse for Presidential Politics. Dalhouse is best known for his civic activism. The head of East House, he is a part-time lecturer. Very adept at leading interesting discussions, he often brings civil rights activists to campus. He offers extra credit for attending events featuring Nashville civic movers and shakers. While Dalhouse is in the history department, his area of concentration is 20th-Century American Political History, so my S’s seminar had a poli sci feel to it. Dalhouse grades his own papers, including very helpful notes and allows a rewrite for the first paper. My S used his AP Comparative and AP Government credits to skip the introductory courses, so he cannot assess them. My S maintains Vanderbilt’s political science department is made up of renowned teachers/lecturers who also happen to be great researchers/writers.</p>