rising_star

@eternallyephemeral, have you actually evaluated the content of the training MSW students receive? Can you say with certainty that the training they receive isn't scientifically based? MSW programs have an accrediting agency. Students are supervised by trained professionals and complete internships and placements, just like clinical psychology PhD students do. Is the root of this that you think that social sciences which aren't psychology aren't rooted in science, don't use empirically derived evidence, etc.? If so, again, that's someone being an elitist about their discipline. Yes, the training MSW students receive is different but that doesn't automatically make it lesser than something else. This is a really old post but it has some good information on the various degree options. It's probably worth noting that, in most states, MSWs can and do provide therapy and receive insurance reimbursement for doing so (see here for more). This page offers a comparison between MFT and MSW degrees, just in case you're interested. Does anyone arguing that MSWs are less qualified or unqualified to engage in evidence-based counseling/therapy have actual evidence to cite in support of this claim? Or is just posturing, blustering, and ideas based on what you think happens in a degree program you aren't in? Please don't make any assumptions about my own training, which includes the notion that different people can approach a problem from different perspectives and still have valuable insight. P.S. If you really want to know about the training MSW students receive, you might try posting on the MSW subforum here and asking folks about it.

This strikes me as taking an elitist "my discipline is the best discipline" approach to thinking about who conducts therapy. Would you say that only those with training in psychology are qualified or could those with a background in nursing or other medical areas be qualified? Ultimately, why is it that you think only specific courses can prepare someone to counsel others? (And also, what good is writing a master's thesis for someone who wants to be doing therapy, counseling, or other hands-on work? What would they gain from devoting extensive time to research, rather than to field experiences?) Because your question made me curious, I googled the MSW curricula for two schools: Florida State University and the University of Georgia. I won't link to FSU because, for whatever reason, the link isn't secure. But the UGA revised curriculum requires courses on human behavior, working with individuals, working with groups, and psychopathology. Even their old clinical curriculum required those courses. Are there specific course requirements you take issue with? Is there really only one "proper" way to be trained to be a counselor?

@RepatMan, you may be able to take research units, rather than specific courses, to maintain full-time status and benefit from being able to transfer in some of your previous coursework.

Where did I say anything about "going out to bars"? Oh, that's right. I didn't. My concern is more that someone who is singlemindedly focused on coursework and research misses out on some of the key learning that's necessary to succeed in academia. As much as I loathe drama and politics, academia is full of them and being able to navigate these successfully is crucial when you're junior faculty. Even outside of academia, every workplace has its drama and it pays to pay attention, even if only so you can avoid getting caught up in it. You don't have to take my advice but, maybe someone else on this thread will find it of value. @SarahBethSortino, I did plenty of socializing (both with my cohort and with others) in grad school that didn't involve going to the bars. We would go out for coffee, have work sessions in local coffee shops, work out together at the gym, watched sports together (live or on tv) etc. A lot of what I did with people was driven by our shared interests. I know that others would go biking, hiking, or rock climbing together, for example. Looking back at my PhD, I had two good friends in my cohort (one MA/PhD student and one PhD student) plus two good friends (one each from the two cohorts ahead of mine*). As others have said, those are the people who have reviewed my grant, fellowship, and job application materials (yes, even when we were applying for the same thing!), given me feedback on drafts of journal articles, etc. In my case, we all have similar-ish research interests, which makes some of those things easier. I've never actually published with any of them, though I also wouldn't rule it out as something that might happen in the future. Those in the cohorts ahead of me were useful for thinking about exams, committees, coursework strategies, navigating weird institutional policies, etc. Here's what I've noticed about those who were from the city where I did my PhD and had a network outside of campus. They didn't make close friends with anyone but then would all of a sudden become very friendly when they needed something. This meant that they were a lot nicer to others when they wanted a copy of your successful fellowship application, for you to share a syllabus and set of assignments you developed, or wanted your feedback on their fellowship/grant materials. I... dislike when people do that. It's one thing to share with your friends and another to share with someone who is basically a stranger that you've seen in the hall sometimes. So, regardless of whether you make lifelong friendships, I'd encourage everyone to cultivate collegial relationships with others in the program so you gain these informal benefits. *BTW, when I say "cohort", I'm referring to when we started our degrees. For any number of reasons, several of us finished around the same time, despite not starting in the same year.

Are you planning on continuing in academia? Because, if so, you may find that there are things to do besides go to class and do your work if you want to be successful...

Apply to schools that match your research interests. You should be fine. Apply directly to PhD programs as there is little program for MS programs in computer science. The better you do on the GRE, the more opportunities you'll have for funding (in terms of university-wide fellowships, national fellowship competitions, etc.). There's really nothing you can do to change your past GPA so keep doing well in the classes you're taking now.

I'm a procrastinator so I did all of my PhD applications in basically the 4-5 weeks before they were due... Maybe not the best approach but I didn't need to take the GRE (had already taken it and had good scores that were still valid), knew who I'd get rec letters from (my MA thesis committee), and already had a sense of the subfield I wanted to be in and the framework (theoretical and methodological) within which I wanted to work. Of course, that last part was only possible because of what I learned during my MA so there's no way I could've started a good PhD application as soon as I started my MA.

I'm guessing the prof was concerned because you listed three different areas (historic archaeology, public archaeology, and CRM). You really only need to write about your interest in one of these for your application, focusing on why you want to study it and how that program will help you do so. Good luck!

I'll be honest: I don't think anyone should ever apply to every single job opening, especially if you already know you aren't willing to move there. For example, I dislike cold weather and rural life enough that I'd never apply for a job in the Dakotas or Alaska. You know yourself. If you like teaching but want significant dedicated time for research, don't apply to schools with a 4/3 or higher teaching load. If you prefer to be in the classroom, don't apply to R1s with a 2/2 or less teaching load. If you aren't sure, then apply to a mix of both at school you could see yourself working out, just to see what happens. I'll be honest and say that I've pretty much always known that I didn't want to work at a R1. But, when I finished my PhD, I did what my advisor wanted and applied to those jobs anyway. It was a waste of my time and of the time of those on the search committee. I'm now in a position where I only apply for jobs that I really want (because of the institution/department, the location, or what specifically they're looking for), which means maybe 4-7 applications a year. At the same time, having been on the market multiple times, I'll be honest and say that submitting 50 applications isn't that much more work than submitting 10 because most of the materials are the same. Your teaching philosophy statement isn't going to change, and neither will your statement of research interests. If anything, you may make small tweaks to those documents so they better match each school but, such changes aren't going to be huge or take very long. Your CV might be reordered to highlight certain things but, again, changes will be minimal. That means that the cover letter is really the only thing that's going to vary a lot from one application to the next and, even then, it's a lot like grad school personal statements in that a lot of the content stays the same regardless of where you're sending the letter. YMMV, obviously. I agree with your advisor that it's worth going on the market as a trial. Also, if you already have fellowships and do somehow land a TT job, you may be able to negotiate a course reduction with the new job or something where you do another semester of fellowship before starting the job. Such things can and do happen in my fields.

It's definitely appropriate and, given the circumstances, you should definitely ask via email. Good luck!

True. When this happens, it's worth checking with the publisher to see if they can send you a free desk copy. In many cases, they're able to do so with only a little bit of information from you.

Honestly, the only way to succeed in grad school is to be yourself. If you are "on" all the time, you will be exhausted and your performance will suffer. If you let grad school consume your life, it can. So don't let it! Seriously. Schedule in downtime, "me" time, etc. As a grad student, I made time to go to happy hour, watch TV with my roommate, and travel to see friends and family. During my PhD coursework phase, I took up a martial art, joined a trivia team with friends, and started lifting weights at the gym, all of which I scheduled and engaged in regularly. I even went to multiple martial arts classes during the 10 days of my comprehensive exams because you can't just read and write all day. If you don't take time for yourself, you won't be successful (which means being burned out, not graduating, not doing well in courses/internships, etc.). Don't listen to anyone that tells you otherwise.

Just to echo what others have said, oral communication skills are important in ALL fields. That's why many undergrad gen ed requirements include a public speaking requirement. Beyond that though, there are very real things which people can do when they have anxiety getting in the way of achieving their goals. One is to talk to a professional counselor or therapist (in your case, I'd value someone with the ability to write prescriptions in addition to specializing in cognitive behavioral therapy or DBT). It sounds to me, Jtek, that you very much need an outside professional to provide insight into what's happening with you. Personally, I wouldn't let something like a fear of oral exams get in the way of pursuing my dream. I doubt you'll find any PhD program which doesn't require an oral defense of the dissertation, at which you'll get asked questions you probably can't anticipate (as fuzzylogician has already pointed out). I'll admit that I'm a person that was also terrified of the oral exam and didn't perform well during it. BUT, I performed just well enough to pass (barely, but barely is really all you need). If the current structure and set of expectations is too much for you, then you can and should talk to professionals (therapists, doctors, Disability Services, your PI) to see if any accommodations or changes can be made. Your committee wants you to pass. They wouldn't be asking you to do the oral exam if they didn't believe that you could pass it. Try to remember that going forward and not act rashly.

Definitely email the Director of Graduate Studies or whomever in the department handles graduate admissions. Keep the email short, sweet, and polite.

I would not give a full explanation over email. Instead, send an email asking for a meeting to discuss your interest in their research, the courses they teach, etc. Don't immediately talk about wanting to join their program because, if you do, they may just tell you to go through the regular application process. So, I would approach it as a conversation about trying to learn about intersections between the two departments, possibilities for teaching and/or research collaborations, etc.

Sure. Explain that after careful consideration, you've decided that this isn't the right time to pursue a PhD. You don't need to explain what you'll be doing instead unless you really want to.

Oh, it's fine for a third or fourth letter to come from outside the department, especially if it adds information to your application which would otherwise be absent.

It depends on the size of the course and the room's layout, as others have suggested. I could never take a test with the person you described, @serenade. The talking @shadowclaw describes would also be intolerable to me. I would be completely distracted and wouldn't be able to do my best. My preferred strategy is to hang out on the side of the room and just keep an eye on what's happening. I'll walk around a little but try not to do it much and make sure I'm wearing shoes that won't make a lot of noise while I'm doing so. I understand people's fear of cheating but there are so many things you can do in test design to minimize this that won't potentially distract students.

Having two recommendations from outside of the field you're intending to study isn't ideal. Do you think you could cultivate a good relationship with someone in psychology between now and when applications are due? If so, do that. If not, try anyway to give yourself more options.

If they said the end of May, I'd wait since it's still the beginning of May.

Agreed with @fuzzylogician. I'd also go for the one where I felt the most comfortable, which will likely be a mix of how welcome you feel and what the actual training entails.

Right, and to write one, you should read the ones which have already been written on similar topics.

Except that "narrative works based on qualitative research" still applies to a number of disciplines, including all of those I listed in my previous response. At the end of the day, it's not your place, as a PhD student, to decide what does and does not qualify as an acceptable dissertation. You are not yet considered an expert in the discipline. No one has given you the proverbial keys to the car yet. Perhaps as you spend more time on committees and reading dissertations, you'll get a better sense of how the work should be evaluated. But, as I've said before length doesn't equal quality nor does it necessarily equate to the depth of the work that went into it.

If you want to continue in academia, go to the program where you'll get research experience and the chance to publish. That it offers better funding makes it an even better choice. Ole Miss all the way.

@Adelaide9216, regardless of the topic, starting with review papers is always the way to go.