Where you get your PhD (Poly Sci)

Graduate School
1

<p>Now that I am working on my Masters (which only takes 16 months) I need to start focusing and getting my applications ready for my PhD program. Now, the question I am asking might sound extremely stupid, but I will go ahead and ask it anyway....does it matter where you get your PhD in Political Science?</p>

<p>Here is my issue....I don't think that I will get into a Top 20 school. While I think that I can be competitive in applying for a place like Washington U, UCLA, Michigan, Ohio State, Minnesota and others, I think I will just be a tad bit outside of making the final cut. I will try to apply for a few of them that I think I have a chance at being accepted, but I am giving myself 50%-50% on those.</p>

<p>This leaves me to the ones lower down the ladder, like University of Washington, Iowa, Texas A&M, Colorado, USC and others. While I do not think I will make it to a Top 20 program, I do think I can make a Top 25-50 program. </p>

<p>So, I finally get to my question. The reason I ask is because I love the University of Utah. I started my BA at Utah but never finished. Also, I loved living in Salt Lake City. Therefore, I would like to have to opportunity to move back because once I am done with my PhD, I will have a 0% chance of landing a job in Salt Lake City as I am focusing on either comparative or IR.</p>

<p>Obviously, if I get accepted to one of the Top 20 programs, I'll take it in a heartbeat. But what if I get accepted to, let's say, Rutgers? At this point, does a resume after graduation with "PhD Rutgers" stand out more than one with "PhD University of Utah"? Or is there a threshold where the university attended becomes less important, and publications and other work that I have done while completing my PhD becomes more important? </p>

<p>Also, because I completed my BA and Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville and my MA at Eastern Illinois University (mostly because I need to stay in the region as well as wanting a stand alone MA in Political Science), will I have no choice but the get my PhD in a Top 50 program to make up for my previous universities attended, or could my publications and other work pull me through?</p>

<p>Also, I am considering both academic and non-academic careers, so everything doesn't hinge on trying to become a professor necessarily. </p>

<p>Any feedback is greatly appreciated, especially those who are pursuing or have a PhD in political science. I have been hearing both yes and no to this question, so I would like to get some truly constructive feedback. Thanks.</p>

2

<p>Yes, it does matter where you do your PhD. Anyone who tells you no is not being completely honest with you.</p>

<p>I’m not sure in political science how much it matters, but in the social sciences generally both your advisor and your program matter. I think in political science your program/department/university may matter more than your advisor, because it’s less of a lab science type deal.</p>

<p>Of course, if you are a publishing powerhouse and get a grant funded or something while you are in graduate school, your program/department/university matters less; however, there are some places where you are more likely to be a publishing powerhouse than others because the culture is just to push out 3-4 papers before you graduate or whatever. But your department will always matter, it will just be that your publications make up for that somewhat. But it’s not just publishing like the average graduate student that will do it - you have to be a superstar in your department.</p>

<p>That also depends on your goals. If you want to go into academia, publications are king and a well-published grad student from a top 25-50 school could probably get a good job - maybe not at Harvard or Swarthmore, but at least at a good solid university or college. But if you want to go into a very prestige-focused world like consulting or IR, where you go is going to matter more.</p>

<p>It’s my personal opinion that you shouldn’t select a PhD based upon geography. It’s a way to rule programs out at the back end, and I’m not saying you should be willing to go somewhere you’ll be miserable. People who have family constraints are also a different story. But you also should not go to a bad program in an area you like just because you want to live there. If you want to move back there, take some time off before your PhD and go live there for 2-3 years to get it out of your system. My mantra is - the more flexibility you allow yourself in graduate school, the more flexibility you will have to select where you want to live and work afterwards. Maybe you (general you, not you specifically) don’t want to live in Ann Arbor, MI for 5 years, but if you go to that program and do well then you’ll have your pick of types of positions and locations at the back end. But if you go to Utah just to live in Salt Lake City for 6-8 years during your program, then you may find yourself with fewer options when you are graduating because the program is unranked.</p>

<p>Will a CV with Rutgers stand out more than one with Utah? I know US News is pretty bad for grad school, but it’s a good aggregator/starting point. So it appears that Rutgers is in the top 50 whereas Utah isn’t even in the top 100. So YES, definitely, Rutgers will look much better than an unranked poli sci program.</p>

<p>I also have the somewhat unpopular opinion that people in general shouldn’t go to a PhD program just to go. IMO, unless one can get into a well-ranked PhD program, one should not get a PhD - the academic/research market that requires PhDs, especially in the social sciences and humanities, is far too glutted and difficult to do otherwise. Now what “well-ranked” is depends on your field - an economics PhD program ranked #85 for econ may still net you a great job (academic or non-academic), whereas the English lit or sociology people going to the #85 program may end up adjuncting or going outside of their field for work. That is unless, of course, you just really want to spend 6-8 years earning low pay and living the grad student life.</p>

<p>Some people would just really rather do that than anything else, and that’s okay for them. And 6 years isn’t a really long time - I’ve been in my program for 5 and it’s flown by. But 6-8 years is also enough time to get promoted once or twice in the non-academic world and get a couple of raises, as well as save some money towards retirement - that’s considered the beginning of mid-career, where you can really get into some administrative positions managing people - so I’m of the mindset that unless those 6-8 years in the program are the ONLY thing you want to do, ever, OR that they will lead you to a set of dream jobs that you really, really want to have - you shouldn’t go.</p>