<p>I have checked about all the website of the top 20 schools and found that all the programs emphasize on the quantitative approach.</p>
<p>Does anyone have any idea which political science program is not quant oriented? I am hoping that I could get into a program with an interest in the historical approach, something that Barrington Moore and Charles Beard had used.</p>
<p>Most schools nowadays will require you to take 1 quantitative methods class. But beyond that, the kind of research you do at a good number of places is up to you. You can do historical work coming out of Harvard, Berkeley (especially as a Latin Americanist or Americanist), Cornell, Northwestern, Chicago, Texas (South Asia or Latin America) etc.</p>
<p>I would avoid: Rochester, UCSD, Stanford, Yale, and most of the big public universities in the midwest if you are really determined not to do quantitative work. </p>
<p>If you want more specific advice, post your area of interest (subfield of political science, regional focus, etc.) and we’ll be able to give more detailed suggestions.</p>
<p>Thanks a lot, porky.</p>
<p>I want to study comparative politics, following Moore’s pattern.</p>
<p>Comparative historical analysis is what I am interested in. I’ve just found out the right word for it.</p>
<p>OK.</p>
<p>For methodological training in this vein, good places include: Harvard, Berkeley, Northwestern, and Cornell. If you’re interested in Europe, the first two are excellent. Northwestern and Berkeley are the best places to do Latin American work of this vein. Harvard and Berkeley for American politics. Cornell for the US, and for Asia and Europe. Also Chicago for Asia.</p>
<p>Hope that helps.</p>
<p>It surely helps a lot. Thanks.</p>
<p>I’ve done some research on the web for the past few days, which leads me to realize that I had made a mistake in thinking that comparative historical analysis was in the field of political science in the first place. It seems that the grandmasters (e.g., Theda Skocpol, Charles Tilly, etc.) of this vein, although they also hold positions in political science departments, are thought more to be sociologist. And it seems that it is in sociology that comparative historical analysis is both granted the status of a legitimate subfield (it is called comparative historical sociology) by the academic consensus as well as having most of the professors interested in it. </p>
<p>So should I choose sociology instead?</p>
<p>porkypig or anyone else, do you have a read on the political philosophy field? Interested in focusing on relating postmodern liberalism to ancient-modern thought, so any schools strong in those two categories.</p>
<p>Anonycc2 - CHA (comparative historical analysis) is strong in both political science and sociology, though it is not the dominant way of doing research in either field. You might look at sociology programs as well, though suggesting particular ones would be outside my area of expertise. </p>
<p>Homestar - that is about as broad an area of interest as one could have in political theory. As for departments strong in both, I don’t really know - I am not a theorist… I would look at Yale, Chicago and Berkeley fairly hard, but that’s more of an informed guess…</p>
<p>Thanks a lot for your input, porkypig.</p>
<p>I’m at UCSD.</p>
<p>Just wanted to say again to avoid UCSD if you’re not looking for quant. Everything is quant here. Insanely so.</p>
Anonycc2 I’ve very similar concerns, looking for a program strong in the comparative-historical tradition. Your post and the relies are a lot more helpful. To which school did you go after all? And given the likelihood that you’re now in the subfield or perhaps not, what would you say to someone in your own shoes eight year later.
What other schools in the mid-tier can I consider?