lewin

Professors. But here is a secret: Some profs have their grad students write the letter, then the prof edits/signs it. Works well for situations like you describe where the day-to-day is done by grad students. I'm not sure of a delicate way to bring this up, however.

It depends on the university. Look for programs that have clearly deliniated Masters and PhD portions. The combined ma/phd programs are where you'll run into more trouble I think.

I basically did what Engali suggested, a combination of a prep book (Princeton or Kaplan, I forget) and my intro psych book. Coincidentally it was an older version of that Gleitman text. Having a psych degree, I studied for two weeks ahead of the exam but, lacking a psych degree, you might need more time. My score was in the same range as those reported up in the thread.

No matter how awesome you are the odds of getting into any particular program are very small because there is so much randomness in the process. What if your potential advisor is on sabbatical? Or not taking students? Many programs take 1-5 students each year so with such a small sample size it's exceptionally competitive. So I can't answer your question, but I would recommend applying to more like 6-10 programs.

^^That's all I was tying to say, that it's possible for people to have reasonable, professional reasons to stay put.

Hey-- Great job on the honours thesis, it's good experience regardless of how it works out. Doing two projects is even better. I have no idea whether you're competitive for an IO program because lots depends on your letters and advisor fit, but I wanted to address this comment: "[My advisor] says that we should have data collected by the end of the summer and he says we will present it somewhere and that it will most likely be published. (I hope it is published in time, because I want to apply next semester)." Not to be a killjoy but your prof shouldn't promise these things before the data are collected. It's like the guy on a first date who's talking about getting married and having kids! First, what if the data don't work out? A reasonable expectation is that 1/3 of studies will "work". Second, depending on where you submit the paper, in social psych it will take 2-18 months to be accepted, even assuming a best case scenario where they accept it without requiring more data. In sum, don't expect anything to be published by the time you apply. You can still tak about the project and your role in your statements, even if it's not published. This publication lag is one reason why few undergrads have real journal publications.

You didn't ask about this but I wanted to point out that three programs is too few. There is a lot of randomness in the application process and applying more widely can reduce its influence. Ten is a nice number.

I was being vague to avoid appearing pompous, but my program is the best in its subfield in my country--not the undergrad's opinion, but well-known in the field. If the student doesn't want to emigrate (which I guess could be construed as a combination of #'s 2 and 3 above but not really) then staying here makes sense. Personally I don't give a shit if the undergrads leave to go elsewhere but there are a few grad students who stayed on with good reason.

^^ There can be rare exceptions to this. If your program is the top in its subfield nobody would blame you for sticking around; they know there are no better opportunities elsewhere.

The tuition is bloody expensive (like $25k/yr?) and there is no financial aid, which made it a no for me. I had wanted the PhD program but didn't get in.

I daresay it's impossible to conduct human research on your own. It's probably best if you just take my word for it, but if anyone needs convincing here are a few reasons why: 1. Journals won't take a paper that didn't have IRB clearance for all studies so it's basically dead data. 2. Can't get IRB clearance without being supervised by a current faculty member. 3. More immediately, how would you recruit participants and where would you run the study? Without a supervisor you won't have access to undergrads and lab space/equipment. ETA:....all this means that, yes, you should contact a former prof and see if they have anything for you.

Yeah sorry I didn't mean to suggest that none of it was appilcable, only that maybe it's not as dire as that article suggestions. I especially agree with your final two words! Myself, I only applied to programs that were funded because I knew I shouldn't do an unfunded program and didn't want to be tempted if it was the only place where I was accepted.

That article is interesting but it's about the humanities and may not generalize to a professional degree like clinical psychology. Even the prospects for natural and social scientists are better than for those in the humanities.

I bet the APA (or some other group) has average salaries for clinical psychologists. That would help answer the "can I repay my debt" question. You could also consider defering for a year and applying to funded programs.

Sorry yes, I definitely assumed research-intensive, PhD. My bad. (do the kids still say that?) At a broader level, the purpose of a PhD is to work your ass off to get as much research done as possible (while staying sane) so that you can have a job at the end. In my program nobody has second jobs but the people who have picked up too many outside activities (volunteering, student politics) have fallen behind in their research. At the outset it's easy to say "I'll only do this in my spare time," but those activities always encroach into research time.

In my department anybody with a part time job wouldn't be making "satisfactory progress". Studies are expected to take up all your time, minus reasonable leisure. If you have time to work at a coffee shop you have time to do more research. Edit to add: Eigen's comment is exactly what I meant, but worded better: "The point is that you could be making *more* progress on any of your other work if you aren't working an outside job, since that time can be devoted to work instead. This doesn't apply in the same way to other "free-time" activitites, that are required for a healthy, happy and holistic life. No one begrudges you for having a life outside the lab, but if you're going to be working anywhere, it should be on your research."

Yeah that's too bad, and weird that only internal students get the tuition waiver. The top-up where I am--a psych dept--is $7500 plus some mandatory light TA work. So it's something like: $17,500 + $7500 top up + $2500 TA - $7000 tuition = $20,500. I guess take some comfort in the fact that (1) it looks good on your cv and (2) if you get SSRHC doctoral next year then you have secure funding, which is good in case your department has cutbacks. Odd situation though!

Does your internal funding include a tuition waiver? Because in my department (not at U of T) everybody pays tuition regardless of funding source. And people with SSHRC are still eligible for TAships so that might be something U of T does too. Some schools try to keep everyone's funding constant so that the advantage of SSRHC is not dollars but prestige or a reduced TA/RA load.

Glad you made the decision not to take a job. Pragmatically, I doubt you would have been able to keep it a secret. What if your professor had showed up to eat at your restaurant? Awkward!

I don't know abou the U.S. but in Canada all government student loan programs require you to state all sources of income. I'm quite certain that receiving a stipend would put you above the point where youd' qualify. Maybe something similar in U.S.? Bank student loans were still available.

Pro tip: The thread replies might be informative, but your poll is going to have a lot of noise in it because it doesn't distinguish between these three categories of respondent. e.g., somebody answers "Three". Is that somebody entering grad school (where three is great) or leaving their PhD (where three is middling)? (ETA: No publications when I entered grad school. Have five right now with a year remaining.)

Yup. The distinction is that NSERC is not reimbursing you for tuition, they're paying you a salary. From your salary you pay tuition so you can claim it.

Probably you've considered this already, but you could take out the loan in your home country and convert the money into USD.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I never said that prestige was more important than publications or that one can't publish outside the Ivy leage. I only said that--all else equal--somebody will have an easier time getting publications at Harvard than at North Idaho Community College because they'll have more resources, etc. On average. Not to be cheeky, but you know what correlation means, right? It doesn't mean that prestigious always means productive, or that non-prestigious always means less productive, only that there is an association. Here is one example. Dartmouth College has an fMRI in the basement of the psych building, exclusively for the use of its faculty and students. Compare this to a school with fewer resources who only gets scanner access between 1am and 7am at the hospital an hour away. Wouldn't it be easier to get research done at Dartmouth than at the other place?

I definitely don't understand the problem. Your loans are from the department? Or who are they paying back? Why do they need to leave school? All in all it sounds like a strange setup.You also said "This semester" so I hope you can understand why I would have no idea that the money was from back in August. My interpretation was: Department says you get $X this term so some students pick up $Y in student loans to make up the difference. Now department says "Actually you're getting X + Z" so now students need to pay back Z in student loan overages. Obviously that wasn't the case.