Leaderboard

Hello everyone. Here in Uruguay the US embassy is issuing visas under expedite requests for students, I already received mine and I know other students that have their appointments scheduled for these days. This means that consulates elsewhere can resume visa services if they choose to do so, depending on local conditions. Good luck!

Just got off the Western waitlist this morning! That means they’re into the second quadrant now for those who are still waiting!

Hi, all! I found this spreadsheet on Reddit of clinical psychology programs that are waiving their GRE Requirement for this fall. (I don't personally plan to schools that only waive their GRE Requirements, but I thought this could help some people!) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SrWySd98Aqf0b0C_XN2KX_Uqt-9q0Hrem-ZX2w-dads/edit?usp=sharing

@needanoffersobad just wanted to elaborate on a few things I mentioned earlier. Each school and academic department in North America has to make its own choices with regards to how it will offer courses during the 2020-2021 school year. Some will not offer classes at all in-person. Some, like my school, will offer online and in-person. Some will go with the majority in-person as if nothing has changed. I'm lucky that I have a choice; I think your perspective will vary depending on how much flexibility your school gives you. For those who have to go back to campus when they don't particularly want to during a pandemic, their attitudes might not be great, and similarly, those who only have the online option might not be thrilled. Totally understandable either way, but for those users who are trying to be provocative in their comments on here, I'd remind them that everything is relative, including perspective. The world does not revolve around any of us, or our opinions. For those of us in particular who might be older, who might have weakened immune systems or something like diabetes or a congenital heart condition, the prospect of being on a large campus right now in a world without a vaccine is terrifying and the opportunity to not miss out on a year of education during a pandemic is absolutely, positively awesome. With that said, if your entire future career is predicated on having every single year of your PhD studies in-person, or if you feel your ability to benefit from online courses is so severely diminished because they are online, then maybe deferring a year until you can hopefully attend everything in person is the best bet for you. My perspective is different from some, and I do not intend for this to sound condescending or arrogant, just manifestly different. I already have a T10 master's degree from a quant intensive program and half a dozen years of quant research/work experience in this field, including several years at a big 4 consulting firm and a few more in government. I'm also already published in this field. I personally do not need the on-campus/in-person experience as badly as some might. I don't have pre-existing health issues, but I'm already statistically at higher risk simply because I'm older. For me, the opportunity to live anywhere I want during a pandemic and take my first year online if I want to is indeed an awesome opportunity because this offers me an unprecedented amount of flexibility, and if I so choose, I can still take everything or whatever I want in person. The majority of my PhD will still be in-person, from a great school, in a field I love. I am grateful simply to be in this position. For others who are straight out of undergrad or who are younger with no professional/research experience and who will be attending an institution that will be going exclusively online this next year, I can see how online-only classes could be deflating, disappointing and inadequate. In that case, I guess it comes down to whether the benefits you'll receive by waiting a year for in-person courses (if you defer) outweighs the year that you will miss out on while the remaining members of your original cohort move on while you do other things for the next year. Either way, good luck and I wish you the best with your decision and the next year.

Hi everyone. I know many of you have probably heard things about how the admissions situation is likely to be harder this upcoming cycle. State budget cuts combined with a decrease in number of undergraduates is likely to decrease the number of funded slots for many universities. Some programs have already said that they are not going admit applicants for the coming cycle -- the number of these programs is still small, but the fact that it is happening at all is worrying. At the same time, there will probably be more applicants: Historically, more people apply to graduate school in times of economic hardship. Everything may look even more uncertain for international applicants. Basically, things are crazy, so I wanted to take the time to a) point out some of the potential bright spots in this mess, and b) suggest some things that applicants can do to increase their chances. If anyone else has any insights or observations, I hope you'll chime in. First, I want to say that even though there will probably be more applicants, you have been preparing for this application season for years. You have done more than anyone who decides to apply to grad school spur of the moment can possibly do, at the very least because you have had more time. In short, I think that if your application was competitive before it is likely still competitive. The second major stumbling block I can see is the uncertain number of slots universities will have to admit graduate students. I don't think anyone can say, yet, how big of a problem this will be. I have heard from professors I work with (at my undergraduate institution, my masters institution, and now at the university where I will do my Ph.D.) that they all expect to admit fewer students. However, they also say that they are just as confused about what will happen and what all of this will mean as we are. So here are some ideas that might help. Apply to an increased number of programs, but do it thoughtfully. To be clear, I am not saying that you should sacrifice fit (although you should also absolutely tailor fit to the professor you are applying to work with). However, if it is financially possible for you, I would suggest applying to more places. Think of it as a numbers game. Look for professors who have their own funding. While some funding agencies will likely re-negotiate the funding already being received in the coming months (e.g., probably NIH), a professor who has their own funding may be more free to decide to take a student than one who is dependent on the department. There are a few ways to tell if a professor has an active grant: First, look at their web page, in particular the grants portion of their CV. Second, look at where their current graduate students are receiving funding -- for instance, teaching assistants usually receive funding from the department while Research Assistants are often attached to a grant. Email professors on whether they will be taking students after school has started. Right now, they don't know what is going to happen. This year, I would wait until the end of September or October. (Also, follow all the usual guidelines for sending these emails. I used an email template I found here last year to formulate my letters and it worked out very well for me). This will also help you focus your resources on places that are more likely to admit you. Apply for funding from external sources. This one is more chancy given that the available external funding is likely to be a) more scarce than before and b) more competitive, but it is also true that if you can bring your own funding then you pose less of a problem for your department. Those are all my ideas for now, but if anything else comes to me/I hear ideas from anyone else I will be sure to pass them along. It is true that most of this is out of everyone's control, so whatever happens don't be too hard on yourself. A lot of the advice I've given above applies even without a pandemic -- however, I would argue that it is even more true now than it is during more normal times. A final random note -- I highly recommend meta-analyses as a way of keeping up your involvement in research if your lab has closed! You guys are awesome. You've got this!

Not sure if it's frowned upon to shamelessly self-promote here, but I ended up starting a blog focused mainly on clinical psychology PhD admissions. I'm using it to organize helpful information I've been given and have stumbled upon, while also sharing resources I've created over the past few years. I'm by no means an expert, but I have some unique insight because I've been through this process a few times, and have grown exponentially each cycle. I've also been fortunate to have exceptional mentorship along the way, which I know not everyone has. I'm hoping what I post is helpful for at least one other person. First timers, it might be especially relevant for you! Check it out if you're interested: www.thedailypsych.com

If your program is going to be on line, and especially if you're gong to be teaching, I very strongly recommend that you ask your department in writing for policy on how to use technology. The policy should have enough "how to," "do-s", and "do nots" that allow you as end users to protect your risk. IMO, the policy should answer questions including: What are a T.A.'s responsibilities as a T.A. if a student does not have access to Zoom? What may T.A.'s do if a student broadcasts from his or her residence wearing controversial items of clothing, or displaying firearms, or is disruptive? Ideally, the policy will include measures for you to be reimbursed for license fees if not also network access and technology. (It's my position that departments should subsidize fully professional accounts that T.A.'s use and mandate that all section meetings be recorded., and that T.A.s be issued equipment that belongs to the school.) I understand and share some of your frustration. I do ask that you understand that many academic institutions are realizing how dependent they are on revenue generated by people being on campus and the revenue generated by taxes on a municipal, county, and state level. In some cases, institutions may be deciding that they simply do not have a choice -- either open campus or start firing people as a broader plan of shutting down entire programs and departments.

I just attended an online panel discussion hosted by the Chronicle of Higher Education and sponsored by Deloitte. The topic was "Sustaining the Private College Business Model in a Global Crisis". The discussion was recorded and I will post a link when it becomes available. For me, the key take away is that COVID-19 has accelerated the time of reckoning for smaller colleges and universities. These institutions have to figure out simultaneously how to reopen campuses for in person instruction and how to make the transition towards sustainable business models. Overall, there is no change to my previous guidance. When developing a list of programs of interest, spend a significant amount of time doing your due diligence on the parent institution's financial health and strategic plan. However, I would add that if you are considering master's programs at a smaller school, expand the scope of your due diligence to include the risks involved in attending a school that may be in severe financial stress within the next five years. Will "guaranteed" funding really be available in year two? Will POIs be able to give you the support you need when they themselves may be under profound stress about their jobs? I would also recommend that anyone making the decision to attend on campus classes the coming academic year take a long hard look at @TMP 's post here.

I actually spoke with a faculty about the GRE situation - they said while many schools are starting to remove the requirement, the faculty still like to see the scores. They told me that a sneaky way to still report your scores is to add them to your CV under schools/GPA. Just a tip I thought I'd share!

hoping responses to optional GRE scores follows the trend from biomed (e.g., https://vanderbiltbiomedg.com/2019/09/21/is-optional-really-optional-for-submitting-gre-scores/)

The research records of people at these places do not have to be anywhere near if you were getting a job at a top 50 statistics department. An average person at these places will have one article in a journal like Statistics in Medicine or Bioinformatics, and some more applied papers, approximately. I'd highly encourage you to take an hour or two and look at the top 50 or so LACs' faculty pages. Also pay attention to the years of the publications. Some I've seen don't have many publications before starting but had papers in progress. I think liberal arts colleges have a lot of incentive to get people doing applied research in things like environmental science, health, social science, etc because they'll get students interested in research. Harder to get a college student to help you with your Annals paper.

Don't play the game of trying to predict which areas will be hot when. It's not a game you can win, except by luck. And it's not a game you'll be well-equipped to play until the end of your PhD at the earliest, when you're much more familiar with the discipline, your fields, have been on the market a number of times, have done the conference circuit a bunch, etc. (Besides which, most hot areas are only briefly hot--that is, they heat up for a few years then hiring peter out because the demand has been mostly filled). Cultivate a diversity of interests, and follow those interests. It's standard for people now to specialize in two (sometimes three) distinct areas; so cultivate your two. Where planning is concerned, try not to cultivate two areas which are dead ends jobs-wise (e.g. aesthetics and 19th-century Germany). But beyond that, just go for what interests you. You won't get a job anyway, so you might as well enjoy it as much as you can!

Good morning everyone, just wanted to let you know I've been accepted into Dalhousie off the waitlist this morning! Best of luck to everyone still waiting ❤️ Stay hopeful, there is definitely some movement happening!

UCalgary Clinical Psych will not require GRE scores this cycle. Source: I am in contact with the faculty there. Official announcement to follow. Will update if there's a link.

I contacted YorkU about what they meant by 'encouraging' but not requiring scores (and if 2 applicants are about equal but one has GRE), and they said that GRE will not factor into admissions this cycle... Still not sure why they said 'encouraged'. I'll be reaching out to a few more schools. If anyone else wants to contact individual schools and clarify their requirements, that would be awesome!

This is true and I have lots of hopeful applicants ask me how programs will factor in the GRE if not everyone submits scores. Truth be told, as grad students, we don't know. I HIGHLY doubt departments/faculty have figured it out either 😕 I'm all for removing the GRE completely. Currently working with various grad students across Canada to remove the GRE, ideally completely. Seriously, us grad students want to get rid of it almost as much as applicants do! 😅

I'm about midway through my program, so this change doesn't affect me directly. However, I really echo @PsychApplicant2 in that the general GRE is absolutely useless for clinical psychology programs (among others). Research has shown that it is only predictive of graduate school success for middle-class white males, so as scientists, I'm not sure why PIs are relying on such an invalid measure for student selection. The cost is prohibitive for many people are within a lower economic threshold (the test itself and the cost of sending scores alone are high, without factoring in prep materials) and it doesn't succesfully predict what it claims to predict. Hopefully this shift will help finally kick this stupid test to the curb once and for all.

Yes, looking at the CV's of recently hired Assistant Professors at these schools is a good way to get some "baseline." It's not a clear-cut set of criteria for TT jobs, so you don't need [x] number of papers, exactly. It's more like if you have *at least* one paper in a top journal AND your research area is something that the department is interested in (so for example, a probabliitist with a very prolific record won't get an interview if the department isn't interested in hiring a probabilitist), then you will usually make it past the initial cut where they trim down all the applications into a set of 20 or so that they look at more carefully. And the more papers you have in top journals, the fewer *total* number of papers you need (for example, an Assistant Professor at UPenn Wharton who joined the department in 2019 had "only" four papers, but three of them were in Annals of Statistics). I don't think working with an Assistant Professor is necessarily an issue. There was one job candidate on the job market in the 2019-2020 hiring cycle who got like, 20 interviews, and her advisor was an Assistant Professor. She also got offers from UIUC, UNC, UFlorida, UMinnesota, Columbia, and probably others as well.

Okay, I'm back to shamelessly self-promote, but only because I created something that I hope some of you could use! Last cycle I started to organize myself by using a spreadsheet for all application related materials. I put quite a bit of time into it, and thought it would be best if other people were able to get some use out of it as well. If you want to see my reasoning for including the tabs and columns you can read that here: https://www.thedailypsych.com/blog/organizing-yourself If you prefer to skip the post and just make yourself a copy to see if you want to use it, you can go here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Tf77N8CTAS_S1VufvL5DqtZnOEqngJHyYid_QVPM6yc/copy?usp=sharing Also let me know if you have a different way of organizing - I'm always looking for more tips on how to store program info!

Since you are from a top school that is known for grade deflation, your grades should make the cutoff for the schools you listed. In order to have a better chance, I would take real analysis this fall since it is going to be helpful even if you do applied research. If you scored an A- or above, I think this would be a positive sign for admissions committee. I would apply straightly to PhD programs and add a few MS programs.

My school has offered us the choice of in person or online for the next year, with everything (including orientation) being offered in both formats. If my choice was online or deferred admission, I'd definitely take the online option. It's unfortunate if online is the only option in lieu of on campus, but at least you'll make progress towards your degree; if you defer for a year in particular, you are losing an entire year. Your cohort will move on without you and they will be a year ahead of you when you do start, and additionally, there are no guarantees about what the format will be in a year anyway. If these are definitely your only choices, recommend you go with remote learning.

I created an account just to respond to this! @swiggles, you remind me of me from seven years ago . I graduated from a tiny (not super well-known) LAC with a 3.0ish GPA in IR. Like you, I had a slew of painfully bad grades, including several Cs, Ds, and Fs in primarily my math and quant-heavy econ classes. Unfortunately, I had no one to blame but myself. I just slacked off too much, prioritized the wrong things (like partying and drinking), etc. While I finally got things together by the end of college, I only barely managed to get my GPA above a 3.0. Needless to say, it was really demotivating. I didn't think I had a chance of getting into ANY graduate school, so I decided to pour my heart into my career and learning from past mistakes. For the next six years, I worked really hard to address my weaker points (like quants). I re-took Macro and Micro at a local community college (received As in both). I took a ton of data analysis classes over a period of 3 years and eventually became so strong in Excel and R that I was asked to conduct trainings on both at work. I volunteered to take on research projects at work that exercised these skills until I was comfortable enough to lead in these areas. I also took a giant risk at the end of 2015 and moved to a country I'd never been to in Sub-Saharan Africa to help lead a major RCT research project for a small health NGO. And finally, I moved to the UK in 2017 to work closely with a professor (himself a Rhodes Scholar) at a well-known institution (think Oxbridge) to conduct research for his project portfolio. When I finally decided I was ready and strong enough to apply for graduate school last year, I worked hard to crush the GRE (eventually got a 334, with a 170Q & 164V). I asked my recommenders (the professor I worked with and my two previous bosses) to highlight my strength in research and quants, which I think may have helped alleviate concerns that AdComms would have had upon seeing my college transcript. I also spent countless hours positioning myself as the "quant person" through my essays and made sure that I had 3 close friends and family members review them until we all felt that they conveyed this successfully. Last year, I applied to: - UChicago Harris MPP - Tufts Fletcher MALD - Duke Sanford MPP - HKS MPP - Columbia SIPA MPA - WWS MPA I got into every school except for WWS where I was waitlisted. I got into Harris, Fletcher, Sanford, and SIPA with substantial scholarships as well (including some full scholarships). HKS didn't offer much money but if you told me seven years ago that I could get into Harvard, I would have laughed in your face. I'll be honest with you- it won't be easy. You're going to have to work really, really hard but if you're up for it and truly intent on learning from your past mistakes and becoming a stronger version of yourself, then you CAN do it. I'm proof that schools truly are holistic in their review process. Good luck! Feel free to message if you have any questions.

And if you can't get an article published in a top journal at this stage of your career, there are good arguments for not publishing it in a lower tier journal just for the sake of having a publication.

Best to everyone beginning their MSW this year. And best to those re-applying for next. Take care everyone!

I would hold off until August/September before you start emailing faculty. Honestly, some schools still don't even know what next semester is going to look like and may be experiencing millions of dollars in lost revenue. Many faculty may not even know it they are taking a student this early on in a regular year. Given everything now, it is even less likely that faculty will know.

I am tired. I know it won't change anything to the situation. I know it's hard for everyone. But I need to vent/rant. I live on my own, two hours away from my hometown. I had moved for my first year of university and had always planned to move back to my hometown afterwards. But because of COVID-19, I have not seen my family and friends in person since March. I am quite an independant woman, and it was okay at the beginning (the first two months). But now, I am fed up to be honest. It impacts my motivation re: my comprehensive exam as well. I have low energy and feel like I'm stuck between my four walls. I can't even do the things I enjoy doing on my own (going to music concerts, watch independant movies at the local movie theater, going to music concerts, etc.). I can't study at the local library or café. I'm at home all day long. All my activities entails going to the grocery store, talking walks with music, and watching some webinars. And cleaning up my appartement. That's it. I speak with my friends and family through Zoom, phonecalls, Messenger, texts daily. But it is not the same thing has having a real human being in front of you or to get a hug. Plus, to my surprise, I fell in love with a man that loves me back during the pandemic (we knew each other for multiple years). He made a love declaration to me and I've responded back positively to it. But he's in my hometown. We speak over the phone daily, but we cannot see or touch each other. Falling in love has impacted my level of concentration. It,s a bit better now, but I still feel like my head is up in the clouds. And I am notorious for how focused I am. But I just can't focus. I think travelling is now allowed between Canadian provinces. I am going to take a shot at taking the train next week to go back to my hometown. Because I am going crazy and feel bored.

Yikes. I haven't even asked about the additional fees, since I don't think I'd like to start my program remotely. I'll have to clarify if a semester-long deferral's still possible though, because I might've received conflicting messages from my program and my school. (There are so many updates and changes to policies that it's so hard to keep up!! 😭) Anyway, solidarity to all other international students currently facing the same dilemmas. We'll get through this... hopefully unscathed. ✊😩

As far as I've heard (from my program), the September deadline isn't school-mandated, it's actually the law (I guess according to USCIS) that if the international student can't arrive by then, they can no longer come for that semester. The fact that a lot of these schools have been cool with us deferring to Spring, I think, is a big plus. Of course, this whole trainwreck of a year is unprecedented, but I was afraid that schools would force students to defer by an entire year since many PhD programs don't allow you to start on a Spring semester. I am glad that (at least for now), we can start in the Spring semester if we can't make it by the end of September. To me, this is what actually seems harsh. Is there a reason you will be charged? Are they admin fees or straight up a percentage of tuition? This seems unfair to me.

Hello guys, Michigan State University granted its foreign Ph.D. students an opportunity to study and receive stipend remotely during the Fall 2020 semester.

Ah finally found the person who created the other list (thank you @PsychApplicant2, we used your list) A current student and I (not a student) created a list for programs in US and Canada https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f6ZyVGn-opa_ijRyntHxfJJkaSNya4h-bwEDeDGInv4/edit#gid=0

Fletcher is the most traditionally academic of the IR schools. Popular amongst prospective students that want to eventually study a PHD. Not sure how Fletcher is going to be able to adapt to the cross-functional, data-driven international policy world of the XXI century. Tufts isn't known for having strong accompanying graduate schools to cross-register at, which makes me think that Fletcher's brand may hurt in the coming years. It'll be interesting to see the how elite tier of IR schools fares in the future. I do think that having strong accompanying graduate schools is essential, as one can tailor courses to their goals.

Lecturer positions at research universities are not tenure-track but are usually fairly secure. At my PhD institution, all the lecturers were able to renew their contracts. It seems like a sweet gig if your passion is teaching. I would have to say that "teaching assistant professors" (i.e. that are tenure-track) are indeed extremely rare. If you want a TT job that prioritizes teaching, you should look for jobs at PUIs -- that is, liberal arts colleges and regional state schools that do not award doctorate degrees. It is a buyer's market though, so even these institutions will want to see some publications, and a lot of newly hired stats faculty will have done a postdoc. You would still need to publish as an Assistant Professor at a PUI, but the publishing requirements would be considerably lower than at a research university for most of these schools (outside the very elite SLACs). Interdisciplinary articles also count towards tenure, and papers written with undergrads are especially well-received. The main criteria for tenure is teaching and service, though. To be competitive for these jobs at PUIs, you should have some publications in respectable venues (not necessarily the top ones like Annals or JASA, but ones in places like Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, etc.) and you should have taught at least one class as an instructor of record. Many PUIs ask you to submit teaching evaluations with your application, and they pay special attention to the cover letter and the teaching philosophy. So you really need to convey in your application materials your passion for teaching and how you can involve undergrads in your research. The search committees are always trying to weed out any applicants who aren't serious about the school's mission and who view the job as a "backup" or as a "stepping stone" to a job at a research university. The campus interview for lecturer positions and AP positions at PUIs also always includes a teaching demonstration, so you would need to prepare for that (in addition to a research job talk if the job is tenure-track).

I wouldn't get a dual degree as the costs are exorbitant and outside of getting an MD, JD or MBA -- pretty much worthless when coupled with a policy degree. You can easily cross-register at the School of Journalism -- or other Columbia graduate schools --- as needed. I think all policy schools are going to make standardized testing optional for at least next year. Ivy League Schools have already adopted this approach for undergraduate admissions. I would still take it and present scores if you hit the 75%+ percentile combined. You'll find more people interested in journalism in the MIA, and the tech + media will probably be evenly distributed. Evan Hill, a 2019 MPA, won the Pulitzer Prize this year for his work with the Visual Investigations Team at the NYT -- so both programs should set you up for it. Yeah, the HKS MPA requires 4 graduate level courses as a prereq. Check the MPP employment snapshot to see if these outcomes interest you, as the program is more domestic and about 1/3 of grads stay in Boston: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/OCA/files/20 DPSA OCA Employment Snapshot_web.pdf Out of those 3 schools, think Georgetown may be the best fit for you. Berkeley is far from the epicenters of IR (DC and NY) and JHU SAIS is primarily geared towards setting graduates up at the WB/IMF. SAIS and SIPA are different in that the outcomes at SAIS are more narrow, and the outcomes of SIPA tend to be broader -- much of them falling in the journalism/media/tech spaces that interest you.

It may feel like overkill, but I don't think it actually is. You've discovered what part of the humanities you want to pursue, and that's all the reason in the world to go for another master's. On top of that, there's no such thing (that I'm aware of) as a "certificate" in English Literature. You may feel behind in English, but in my opinion a broader knowledge base to draw from can make you a more interesting scholar. There are plenty of hyperspecialists in English. Maybe think of ways to do scholarship in English that pulls on your more general Humanities background and sets you apart.

Social Psychology at the University of Houston! Please feel free to message me if you're attending UH!

Ditto to @Sigaba's points about TA responsibilities. Since TAing for online classes actually involved MORE work than in-person, do your due diligence to keep track of your active hours so you are not going beyond the maximum time limit (generally 20 hr/week for 50%/.5 appointmnt)

UGuelph just announced they no longer require either GRE (General, Psych) for upcoming admissions cycle.

Hi all, I was invited for the pre-interview for the P2 Partnerships Officer. Has anyone taken it yet? If so, would you kindly mind sharing your experience?

Depends on what sort of data work you want to do. If you are interested in research questions that may use big data, the more the better. Normal data sets with maybe a few thousand observations you would be fine with 8GB

You're right the optics don't look good for undergrad. But it is possible to get accepted. It needs to be balanced against everything else. Your grades in grad school are not bad, not the best, but it is possible to get accepted. Again, all things considered. Your letter writers, though, should mitigate against this. They should be able to say that your grades put you in the 85 percentile or 90 percentile, or ideally, >95 percentile. Make sure you have excellent letter writers with plenty positive to say about you. The things you need to work on: writing sample should be immaculate. It should have an argument. It should have support for that argument. It should be clear, with linear flow and headers and verbal signposting. It should handle a topic that shows you did research outside of the course syllabus. It should be readable by someone who has never read the author you are dealing with, or has never even read the topic being handled. In order to accomplish this, seek advice about the best paper you can put forward. Ask your letter writers for advice. Be open minded about re-writing the paper from scratch. Ask friends who have never touched your topic to read it for clarity. Flag everything that they said was not clear. Ask your philosopher friends whether you've given a good argument. Ask the professor you wrote the paper for what you need to fix to make it a competitive writing sample. Fix everything they tell you is wrong. In case it is not obvious: your writing sample can't be co-authored. In other news, if you do everything right, you can still get shut out while applying for 20 programs. It is extremely competitive. It has a lottery-like aspect to it.

Oh yeah, given that your MS is from a top department like that, you'll do better than my above advice, sorry. I'd apply to any biostat program and could see schools like Michigan as possibilities too, and think you should at the very least get into some departments similar to the 30-40 ranked one you are in now.

I definitely second the above comment. A publication in a top journal is a huge plus, but having no publications will not count against you. I doubt that even 10% of admitted applicants to top-3 PhD programs in philosophy have a publication in a top journal. Can't say that I've studied this issue scientifically, but I have looked at a lot of CVs.

At least at most analytic programs, publications will not matter unless they are in top journals. At that stage, if you've managed to get something published at a top journal then you should, one would expect, have an extremely good writing sample.

I got aboslutely amazing and extraordinary professional opportunities in the last couple of weeks alone. Opportunies that I would've never dreamed of in my entire life. Plus ,I am no longer single. Thank you life.

From an email I got on Friday from Lauren about Fall 2020 Registration (if you didn’t get the email you should probably ask to be added to the email list): “Two courses have recently been updated to the following codes – INAF 5011 is now INAF 5017, and INAF 5012 is now INAF 5018. These changes will be made by the time you are able to register on July 3, so the change may not be reflected on Monday.”

By and large, the PsyDs worth applying to offer funding. The ones that don't are more often associated with reputations of being diploma mills. Look at incoming class sizes. Some PsyDs have cohorts of 80+ students and offer poor funding if any, and then others have cohort sizes of 10 or less, and they offer more funding options. Quality, university-based PsyDs have a pretty commensurate research program to balanced PhD programs. For instance, I am at a funded university-based PsyD and I am spending my summer working on 3 separate manuscripts I am co-authoring (2 with faculty and 1 with a psychologist from my practicum site), as well as analyzing some pilot test data for my dissertation. During the semester, we spend at minimum 8-10 hours a week on lab related activities, but it usually comes out to more. Research is important for good clinical skills. If you don't know how to do the research, it is much more difficult to critique the research coming out and separating good science from junk science. Even if you aren't planning on a research career, having an in depth understanding of research methodology and statistics is going to go a long way when examining research on efficacy and effectiveness of treatment interventions and assessment tools, which inform good, evidence-based practice.

Hey there. Your application is VERY competitive, on paper. Great job My only advise would be to remember that research match is the single most important factor in getting accepted. It doesn't matter how awesome your CV is, if you are not a great research match with the PI, you are very likely not going to get invited to interview, or get an acceptance. So make sure you are doing the networking now to establish relationships at the universities you want to apply to, and you do an amazing job writing personal statements that reflect how well your research interests matches up with the PI you apply to work with. It's all about research fit, and who you have established relationships with. Good luck!

Baylor would not be a good fit for this sort of thing, nor does it belong in a list with a bunch of fundamentalist institutions

I think calling it a "postmodern-leaning establishment" is going to do far more to tank your chances than either your political affiliation or interest in Calvin Coolidge. Like, what does that even mean? There are certainly party affiliation trends within fields, but as long as you are a good scholar and don't act unprofessionally (which goes for what I presume you call SJW snowflakes as much as it goes for the neo-Nazis), nobody will care.