lewin

Because I disagree that some aspect of one person's personal life (i.e., kids) should take priority over some aspect of another's (i.e., anything else). Favouring parents is not a neutral decision; it creates real costs for non-parents (e.g., the people now burdened with a 90 minute commute to their TA) who are, essentially, subsidizing someone else's decision to have children. Less applicable for academics, but I recently read an article arguing that parents should get priority for having holidays off. But wouldn't non-parents like to spend holidays with relatives too?

Mostly, I just want organizations with these policies to be aware of the consequences and make decisions in an informed way, not just make the assumption that "because I have kids" is an excuse that should be accepted without question. And I want parents to acknowledge that their kids don't necessarily have the same priority for me as they do for you, and that's not selfish or wrong somehow.

"[Evening] classes are taught by grad students, adjuncts, or the childless faculty." I totally support the first two groups from that list teaching all the evening classes. And there are ways to accomplish the same goal without explicitly favouring one group, such as paying mileage or a shift premium. If evening classes pay more, some people will choose that of their own accord.


(As an aside, on this issue, I do find myself sympathetic to arguments that by not favoring parents we're unintentionally harming women and contributing to gender imbalances.)


ETA: tldr: Parents spending time with their kids isn't more important than me spending time with my dog, or anything else I want to do.

1. Sorry, if I wasn't clear: I didn't mean to say your advisor shouldn't get involved, just that at my institution they typically don't.

2. "I think I should be treated differently because I have kids." We can agree to disagree

Two minor points:

1. My supervisor has no interest in or influence over my TA assignments. It's all done by administrators. Norms at other places might differ but I wouldn't get him involved in a TA dispute.

2. I'd be irritated if having kids trumped other concerns (e.g., seniority). It gets dicey when some people's personal lives (e.g., kids) are given priority over others (e.g., seeing my partner, watching TV with wine). It's not the TA-assigners job to make those kinds of judgments.

Fixed that for you. If other people prefer the other TA because of its location then it should be easy to switch without using children as the reason. But now you're equivocating. Your original post said: "...because I am a single mom of two elementary-school aged kids, I preferred to stay close to the university." It's unreasonable to expect someone else to travel if the sole reason is that you have kids and don't want to travel yourself.

And nobody was suggesting you shouldn't decline the TA if that choice works better for you. (I'm glad you're getting the RA's instead!) The option to decline a TA should be open to anyone regardless of reason. But if you're arguing that you deserve a local TA (which unarguably means that somebody else needs to take the far one) because of children, I don't accept that reason.

Fixed that for you. If other people prefer the other TA because of its location then it should be easy to switch without using children as the reason. But now you're equivocating. Your original post said: "...because I am a single mom of two elementary-school aged kids, I preferred to stay close to the university." It's unreasonable to expect someone else to travel if the sole reason is that you have kids and don't want to travel yourself.

And nobody was suggesting you shouldn't decline the TA if that choice works better for you. (I'm glad you're getting the RA's instead!) The option to decline a TA should be open to anyone regardless of reason. But if you're arguing that you deserve a local TA (which unarguably means that somebody else needs to take the far one) because of children, I don't accept that reason.

Because I disagree that some aspect of one person's personal life (i.e., kids) should take priority over some aspect of another's (i.e., anything else). Favouring parents is not a neutral decision; it creates real costs for non-parents (e.g., the people now burdened with a 90 minute commute to their TA) who are, essentially, subsidizing someone else's decision to have children. Less applicable for academics, but I recently read an article arguing that parents should get priority for having holidays off. But wouldn't non-parents like to spend holidays with relatives too?

Mostly, I just want organizations with these policies to be aware of the consequences and make decisions in an informed way, not just make the assumption that "because I have kids" is an excuse that should be accepted without question. And I want parents to acknowledge that their kids don't necessarily have the same priority for me as they do for you, and that's not selfish or wrong somehow.

"[Evening] classes are taught by grad students, adjuncts, or the childless faculty." I totally support the first two groups from that list teaching all the evening classes. And there are ways to accomplish the same goal without explicitly favouring one group, such as paying mileage or a shift premium. If evening classes pay more, some people will choose that of their own accord.


(As an aside, on this issue, I do find myself sympathetic to arguments that by not favoring parents we're unintentionally harming women and contributing to gender imbalances.)


ETA: tldr: Parents spending time with their kids isn't more important than me spending time with my dog, or anything else I want to do.

Actually, I'm very aware of how much time parenting takes up. But that's why we've decided not to have kids until we feel like we have the time to take care of them.

And I don't know how you would look at someone else getting shuffled into a TA position with a long drive while you get one on the main campus as anything other than someone else covering for you, especially if the only reason it happened is because you have kids.

That said, I'm glad to hear the issue was resolved.

Also, I wanted to comment on this:



In my experience, this is usually counterbalanced by said faculty taking classes at another time. That's a different situation than someone getting to teach a class on campus, and someone else being forced to make the long drive to a satellite campus. Most of our faculty with kids take the early classes, and the childless faculty take evening classes. No one really wants to do either, so it works out well all around.

There's a difference between splitting up unpopular tasks to best fit everyone and giving broadly unpopular tasks (long drive) to someone childless over someone with children.

I have to side with Lewin on this.

I'm sympathetic to those who have kids and have tough teaching assignments, but there's a difference between being sympathetic and having to take the less-optimal assignments because of them.

Children, like many other things you take on in life are a choice. If my wife and I are choosing to spend our time and efforts on something other than having kids, it's not fair to me to have to "cover" for someone else who made the opposite choice.

In this case, I shouldn't have to be the one to drive 90 minutes just because I don't have kids and someone else does. And when I have kids, I wouldn't expect someone else to make that drive for me just because I have kids.

1. Sorry, if I wasn't clear: I didn't mean to say your advisor shouldn't get involved, just that at my institution they typically don't.

2. "I think I should be treated differently because I have kids." We can agree to disagree

and in regards to "feminists," I'm talking about women who will do and say anything to justify their position of victimization in a -- so they want to emphasize -- "patriarchal society". so they jump on the bandwagon when cases like this leak, as they get to suspect a man for being oh-so-evil! they tend to disregard the fact that men 1) have their unique feelings and insecurities and 2) women can make up stories precisely to take advantage of a "victim" position. these "feminists" make me ashamed to be one myself.

See, the problem I see in this thread (and in may similar trains of discussion) is that people lump "graduate school" all together.

While there are similarities, there's a difference between being, say, a good college athlete and an olympic caliber athlete. There are top level, highly competitive programs that are there to push (and create) the upper echelon of academics. Those people that love their work so much that it becomes their life- just like with any other top career (music and athletics come to mind).

Then there are other, solid programs for people who really love what they do, but don't love it so much that it's the only thing in their life. I go to such a program, and there are a number of them out there.

Will I be highly competitive for jobs teaching at a top-10 school? Probably not, but I knew that going in. I like my work, and I like to teach, and I would be perfectly happy at any of the lower tier schools out there.

There's nothing wrong with "elite" programs that cater to and are built around people who are obsessed with their work. But those don't make up the entirety of graduate education.

How has " it[] taken the Web by storm (in a very negative way)" ? It seems like par for the course. I usually run into a post doc or two when I'm in on my late night lab sessions. Haven't seen too many profs on the weekends, but I can usually get ahold of them easily via email. Mine like to work from home.

If you didn't mention that you have young kids and this plays a role in your desire not to travel far for your TAships, be certain to do so in the future.

It's great that you got your first choice preference in the past, but I still fail to see how not getting it now is the result of some kind of politics. I also don't understand why you're making such a big deal out of not being asked or told before you were assigned a less preferred course. At the end of the day you're a first-year student and no one needs to get your permission to make TA assignments. I also don't think that ascribing this result to being a woman or a minority is particularly helpful. Indeed, there are many ways in which women and minorities have a harder time than white males in academia (and everywhere else) but you've yet to give me a reason to see this as an instance of discrimination.

It's great that they ask for your preferences and hopefully you'll actually get your first choice when you're more senior but I still entirely fail to see how your not getting your top choice is anything other than a simple fact of life - you're junior and other people's requests trumped yours. I don't see how your being a woman or minority is related, unless you can point out a general tendency to grant white males' requests before other people's, regardless of seniority and other legitimate factors.

I am not sure where there are "politics" involved? I imagine that no one wanted to make the 1.5 hour drive, for the very good reason that it is a 1.5 hour drive. You, as you point out, are on the bottom of the seniority ladder in this case. That seems fairly clear-cut and not like any kind of personal animosity is in play.

I think requesting to swap out another quarter-time RA ship, or convert your quarter-time into a half-time position (that could be funky with funding, though if the school's covering it I imagine it could work) is a good place to start.

1. Three years and no pubs is not a good sign. You need an active advisor who knows how to get published.

2. I'm going to head out on a limb here and suggest you're attitude comes off as a little know-it-all (e.g., "cherry picked images" "review the data with me in a comprehensive fashion" "she is so defensive"). It's possible that you know much better than your advisor does, but it's also possible that she's the expert and you, being in training, can't recognize your ignorance in some area.

Point #1 suggests that maybe you're right and should get out of her lab. But I just want to throw out #2 as a possibility too in case you feel the need to do some soul searching.

Oh dear. I don't know your field specifically but that seems like terrible advice. My advisor will send our drafts to people he knows personally (and I assume they reciprocate). This is common. Cold emailing strangers, however, seems fraught with peril. Really, that's what peer review is for. Unfortunately, you're in a dilemma because it's your advisor telling you to do this.

How can we make the best of this bad situation...?

Start with self-deprecation: I am a PhD student, this is a new area of research, I am looking for advice....

Follow with flattery: As an expert in this area, your advice or opinion on this would be very helpful... I enjoyed papers X and Y immensely....

End by tempering expectations: I know you are probably quite busy, I appreciate any attention you can give, I would completely understand if you don't have the time.


Optional inclusion: Pass the buck. My advisor and co-author asked me to send this paper to you because he/she though you would have valuable feedback...

Stronger passing the buck: Although I was hesitant to impose on your time, my advisor asked me to send this to you because....
(I'd personally go with buck passing option #1)

The New York Psychoanalytic Institute is the place to be. But you need an MD or PhD first. Psychoanalysis! The only profession where 40 years old is young.

You have a scholarship that specifically pays application fees? That's intriguing. Though also consider the time involved; it's better to customize 10 great applications than half-ass 25. (If you have time and money to do 25 great ones, more power to you.) My own strategy was 3 dream schools, 5 realistic ones I'd still love to attend, and 3 that I'd attend but weren't great fits.

Oh dear. I don't know your field specifically but that seems like terrible advice. My advisor will send our drafts to people he knows personally (and I assume they reciprocate). This is common. Cold emailing strangers, however, seems fraught with peril. Really, that's what peer review is for. Unfortunately, you're in a dilemma because it's your advisor telling you to do this.

How can we make the best of this bad situation...?

Start with self-deprecation: I am a PhD student, this is a new area of research, I am looking for advice....

Follow with flattery: As an expert in this area, your advice or opinion on this would be very helpful... I enjoyed papers X and Y immensely....

End by tempering expectations: I know you are probably quite busy, I appreciate any attention you can give, I would completely understand if you don't have the time.


Optional inclusion: Pass the buck. My advisor and co-author asked me to send this paper to you because he/she though you would have valuable feedback...

Stronger passing the buck: Although I was hesitant to impose on your time, my advisor asked me to send this to you because....
(I'd personally go with buck passing option #1)

"How can you tell when an interview went well or poorly?"

When you get the offer, or not.

But seriously, there's nothing you can do about it either way at this point so it's probably best to just put it out of your mind and relax

Discussing your psychological/physical/genetic disorders almost always works against you.
--you get to focused on telling "your story" and most people frankly end up missing the point of the SOP when they attempt this (or they come off sounding self-important, like no one else can be a good psychologist, but usually they waste space needed for other info)
--people worry that you're only committed to "me-search" instead of research broadly
--ad-coms are still humans, subject to biases against people with psychological disorders, even psychologists

Maybe the advocacy thing can be helpful but I'd probably only use it in the first few sentences as a set-up for the rest of the SOP. Definitely not more than 1-2 sentences.

1) Nope.
2) For most clinical psych programs, you're going to need to take both. You will definitely need to take the general GRE.
3) http://psychology.unl.edu/psichi/Graduate_School_Application_Kisses_of_Death.pdf
4) It'll depend on the school, but I've had to send transcripts from every program I've attended for my PhD programs.

Here's an uneducated guess: There is no official policy at Columbia. There is probably no official policy in each individual department at Columbia, but if they existed they would not necessarily be the same across departments. Each professor probably has his/her own grading policy.

Are you worried about the "value" of your A+? Stop worrying. An A+ is a great grade, any way you look at it. Besides, grades aren't that important in graduate school anyway.