XYZ1234

This is absolutely not the case. PIs do not hand out authorship. The first author is the lead in determining coauthorship. Ideally, all authors should collectively agree. I said nothing about it being black and white.

I don't understand why he would take your name off the researchgate or the Arvix papers? Does he think that no one's going to notice the difference in co-authorship between the papers? This just makes himself look bad. Also this may be against journal policy.

Standards for co-author inclusion are not made by the PI. The standards are actually made by the scientific community and in some cases the journal in which the article was published. Many people in the community have made great strides in determining standards to stop the unethical practices seen in co-authorship practices. This shouldn't matter. Whether its published or not, it's still plagiarism.

For what it's worth, I think you are being too hard on yourself. To put it into perspective, two years is a small amount of time in your life and everyone goes through periods where they are successful and productive and less productive and successful. Your performance is not due to a lack of motivation or laziness. Its sounds like you tried to give it your all and you should be proud of that. I do not think you should let this experience define yourself as a failure. Your advisor's judgment on your ability to succeed in a PhD program is based on two years but she/he hasnt known you long enough to know what you are capable of. I understand your predicament because your advisors' recommendation is very important for getting into a PhD program. I think the way forward is to get more experience as a technician in a research lab and make strong connections in your field. I do not have experience with Clinical Psychology Programs, but I know quite a few people who didn't do well in their undergrad, but were able to get into PhD programs because they made strong connections with potential advisors.

I know this may be a long shot. But has anyone heard back from this program?

This.

to move on and not let getting into grad school define my life. The ecological sciences are so poorly funded especially under this current administration I don't even think its worth it anymore. Probably should move to Canada. I financially cannot afford to take a gap year. Getting a temporary bio tech job is harder than one thinks. Most of the science jobs I have been interviewed for are permanent and employers want to people who will demonstrate loyalty. I will probably have to take underpaid internships just to keep my skills relevant but I definitely cannot afford to do that.

Harry Potter. Taylor Swift.

In the long run, it will be better for you and everyone else if you are honest about your true interests. There are actual students who are passionate about biochemistry and they should get those admission spots. Its likely you will be interviewed for these programs, and unless you are a good actor, you will most likely come across as having a lack of passion for biochemistry. Practically speaking how easy would it be to transfer to more computer centered research once you got in? Likely the advisors you would want to work with could be in the computer department not biochemistry department so its unclear how you would transfer. When you apply to grad school you apply to a specific program. However, there could be computer centered labs in the biochemistry department and you could maybe rotate into those labs. However, from what I understand, its not like you can choose which lab you want to work in freely; it still has to be a good fit. I think it would be best to be honest, apply to the computational biology program, and argue in your SOP how you can transfer your skills and qualities to computer-related research.

For my TAship, I was not aware if they did a background check on me. If they did it was probably something very basic like a criminal background. I'm pretty sure they did not contact my previous employers. I wouldn't worry about it. If the school has a HR website you may be able to find some information without directly asking them.

After looking at job ads for a while now, many employers outside of academia prefer or require a PhD. A masters is simply not enough to cut it for a career in research outside or inside academia especially if you want to head or run a lab. Employers know they can get a PhD since there is a surplus of them.

I don't think it would hurt to at least contact your prospective PI or graduate coordinator of the program. I contacted them and they were fairly receptive and responded fairly quickly.

Yeah, I'm worrying about this a lot. I'm in the ecological sciences. The republican congress is seeking to make drastic cuts to the budget. Any insight would be appreciated. I think it would also depend on what type of research you're going into. Some fields are going to get hit harder than others.

I have been in a temp to perm position that I quit for graduate school. They don't care if you wait till two weeks. They could easily dispense of you as you are a temp. There is a lot turnover in those positions anyway.

Typically yes, but it may vary from 9 month to 12 months depending on the program. I would recommend looking at the graduate program handbook (they are usually on the specific department website) or contacting the graduate coordinator at these programs. If you cannot get insurance you may qualify for medicaid or low-cost insurance.