geographyrocks

Yeah, one problem is that he is not very clear in what he wants or how he will grade something. Although, I'm not talking about partially correct answers. I'm saying that the answers are correct, but he wants detail that doesn't need to be included for the answer to be correct. Another problem is that other people are saying that they aren't following his lectures very well. I don't think they're horrible, but I've had this type of class before, and I'm very familiar with the subject matter. He tends to dwell on things that are simple and breeze through the complicated portions (generally partial differential equations). I personally think he does this with things he is less comfortable with teaching. Either way, everyone is pretty unhappy with the class. I think it would behoove him to have an impromptu, anonymous mid-semester survey. I suggested that to my adviser which was probably the only helpful thing I said. I sometimes babble like an idiot when I'm uncomfortable. Additionally, since this guy is so new, end-of-year student surveys could have a negative impact on future job prospects.

Is there someone else who would be willing to submit a letter at the last minute? I only ask because I emailed a professor several times over the past month with absolutely no response. Thankfully, I had another professor I could ask. This would be the safest thing for you to do. You could rank the new "savior" letter writer as 4th on the NSF website. Other options: call them. If that doesn't work, call the secretary. Since they're ranked in the top 3 letter writers, if they submit a letter, the reviewers will see that letter instead of the "savior" letter. Not being able to get a professor to respond is the worst.

It's an unusual situation because the class is being taught by a "baby" (only a couple of years since earning his PhD) professor who generally teaches basic science to education majors. This is his first undergrad/grad level class with a classroom full of science majors. My adviser, who is the regular professor for this class, has asked me previously what I thought. I'm wondering if he might bring it up again during our meeting today since I'm sure he's heard the midterm results by now. The class doesn't seem to like his teaching style much (and I'm sure the opinion is worse now that we have our midterms back). I know that many of the undergraduates are failing due to the midterm. They scored more in the 20%-30% range before the ~30 point curve. Even with the curve, most are in the failing range. I guess I should bring up with my adviser, but I hate being THAT person.

Geological Society of America

I had a feeling saying "I don't see the distinction" would be misconstrued. I'm well aware that NSF grants follow the person no matter where they go (although that is a good point for anyone who reads this and didn't know that). What I meant was that even if it doesn't fund your research for 3 years, it funds you as a researcher for 3 years so you should be able to show that you can be a researcher for 3 years. I'm starting to have a feeling that we're quibbling more over terminology and phrasing rather than the underlying point. So what I'm trying to say is, I think that the significance of your research should be longer than 1 year to show that you can form a complex research plan.

I have a professor that "gives" points on an exam rather than takes points away for wrong answers. So you could give the right answer, but if you don't provide enough details (the details he wants you to provide), you get less credit. He never told the class about his odd version of grading so the class average for the midterm was around %40. Has anyone had a professor that did this? Had he specified what he wanted before the test, I wouldn't be so irritated. The person who received the highest score does not get the material at all (She said this herself). She only received the highest score because she provided as many details as possible because she didn't actually know the right answer.

The research proposals I've been reading (which is A LOT, I think I'm obsessed!) tend to lay out a long-term project. By long-term, I mean longer than a semester or a year. NSF may fund the person and not the project, but I don't see the logic in funding a person who can only propose a short-term project. I also don't see a short-term project as proof that you can "plan feasible and significant research projects". There are always exceptions, of course. But I think generally, longer term projects tend to be more significant. I don't see the distinction beyond the fact that your research can change over time. NSF funds the researcher for 3 years which in my mind means you need to BE a researcher for 3 years which includes time to write it all up as well. Either way, I'm not encouraging anyone to try to outline their dissertation. I've never been a reviewer for NSF so all of this is opinion mixed with things I've read. Edit: I love this website: http://www.alexhunterlang.com/nsf-fellowship

Don't just ask the head of the department. They have a lot on their plate and are probably less aware of opportunities than others in the department. They just don't have the time to pay attention. The graduate secretary, on the other hand, is an amazing person who somehow manages to remember everything! Make sure you also ask your adviser (or potential adviser). They benefit the most from helping you find a job that fits your schedule and pays well enough that you don't have to drop out of graduate school just to pay bills.

It is not unethical to continue research on something you've already started. This is indeed the purpose, but your proposal needs have a larger scope than 1 semester or even 1 year. The NSF funds research for 3 years so whatever you propose should be the equivalent of the money you are asking for.

The typical work study rate that I have seen is around $10/hr. However, it may be more in larger cities where the cost of living is higher. I'm not really sure about that. You can make more if you are able to get a more specialized position. Work study positions generally go through financial aid. My university is nice enough to list their positions online along with payrate. You might want to google your school's name and either "jobs", "careers", or "work study". My biggest piece of advice is to start asking the professors and office staff in your department. They sometime know of positions others don't. They also tend to be close to alumni who are now in the position to help current graduate students get a part-time position with the company they work for.

Are you sure it should address research only? If so, I would use it as a past/present sort of statement. You can lead in with what you've done and how that has influenced the direction you think you may want to go. Be sure to outline the different methods of analysis that was used in your research. Writing two pages ends up being easier than you think. Most schools do not expect an undergraduate to have a focused research plan going in. I'm really surprised that a masters program would even ask for a research statement since it's common for masters students to work on whatever research their adviser is working on.

Most applications will state the LOR deadline IF it is different than the application deadline. Most of the time, everything is due at once. Submit early so your LOR have the link available to them.

Well...AGU, AAG, GSA...and now my mind is drawing a blank. This website has a pretty good list: http://www.geosociety.org/links/ The three I listed are generally considered the "top" in the US.

What I think I would end up doing is using pay stubs from my current job. It's been my experience that the only places that will rent to you without needing proof of income are places that you don't want to live.

You would think so, but my undergrad department was amazingly unhelpful. I don't know how many departments are like that. For the sake of others, I'm hoping very few. I actually had a professor tell me that I shouldn't apply to PhD programs because I wasn't male or a genius. I think I was really misreading tone earlier (damn you written words!). I think the problem of not knowing about opportunities generally stems from being a first generation college student. I think ego also plays a role if you don't ask because you're afraid of looking like you don't know anything. I think I won the crap basket of schools because the community college I went to didn't even know how to advise student who were planning on transferring to a 4 year let alone communicate research opportunities. The first 3 classes I was advised to take (meaning that I had to take the classes that the adviser recommended) were all non-transferable courses. I really wish I hadn't relied on the adviser and actively argued for different courses. I was completely unaware that I was being screwed. Basically, nothing was communicated and there was no way to "discover it on your own" because the CC website didn't even have the necessary information. So even though I specifically stated that I would be transferring after my AS, not one single professor, adviser, or representative bothered to give me the necessary information. So I guess what I'm trying to say that while it is the student's responsibility to seek out opportunities, it's very difficult to do so when you don't know that is what you should be doing. Heh...I think I just created an infinite loop sentence. Writing grant proposals is making me wacky.

My adviser flat out said that admission committees don't expect every student to have the same research experience because opportunities are different at every school. I, like you, came from a rural school with very few research opportunities. This is completely off. It may be the job of the professors to help their students, but a lot of professors haven't attended grad school in decades. Most of my undergrad professors had no idea what the process was for graduate school. I have no idea where you are getting these ideas, but I think you are naive to how many people out there didn't have a "perfect" set up for graduate school. Hell, I went to community college first to save on money. I'm sure that alone would mark me as a big fat NO to be accepted into graduate school according to your standards. Luckily, admission committees are more aware of how real life works and take way more into consideration than you are. I would have commented on this thread, but I don't want interested students seeing this post and thinking that they have no shot at graduate school simply because their experience doesn't conform to the textbook experience you think people should have. Most admissions committees want to see that you are capable of research. You are attempting to gain that research experience which is a good thing. Definitely play up what you learned in the labs when writing your SOP. You could even add the REUs that you didn't get into as "experieince builders" and how that failure increased your determination. Have you written anything? Conferences? Poster presentations? It's not too late to submit abstracts for local events (even if it's just at your school). Your stats are great, by the way. To add an anecdote, I had 1 summer of research and my senior thesis (which I guess technically counts as an additional year of research). And now I'm working with an amazing adviser in a wonderful department.

Fill out the FAFSA and get everything set up with financial aid. It doesn't take very long and it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Funding offers are generally made in acceptance letters. If you're offered funding, it could be any combinatioin of scholarships, fellowships, and assistantships depending on the program and school. The way it is awarded is also based on school. For example, some schools don't consider tuition waivers as financial aid whereas my school considers the non-resident portion that is waived as financial aid whereas the portion that my department "pays" the school is not considered financial aid. Some schools require you to apply for funding. It should be specified on their websites. Most grants that you will apply for are external, but schools can have their own scholarships. Again, some scholarships are considered financial aid while others might not be.

I'm not a psychologist, but I am certifiably crazy (ask my therapist!) so my question to you is this: What exactly are you hoping to fix by getting married and having children? You seem at least marginally self-aware so you should know that this: is an EXTREMELY unhealthy thought. That right there is liable to get you into a mess of a situation that would be more harmful than it would be fulfilling. I think the problem that you have with being around happy couples is just a symptom of a bigger problem. You really need therapy more than once a month. Talk with the counseling center. They are normally willing to bend any rules they have for people that show true need. And I think you really need more intense therapy to become comfortable with whatever it was in your life that hurt you so bad that you think only a husband and child can fill it. This is obviously all just my opinion, but if you are serious about getting your mental state healthy again, you might want to think about these things.

Well, I'm convinced. You make an excellent case for headings, and I think I will change my statements to include them. Plus, if I was a reviewer, I would give higher marks to those that made it easier to find the vital portions amongst the narrative.

How the bleepity bleep bleep bleep am I sick again???? Bleep!

Sooooo many research papers. Research papers everywhere! Aaaaaggghhhhh, they're after me! They want my soul! Aaaaggghhhhh! And everytime I kill off a research paper, there's a grant application staring me in the face. My only real complaint is that I will soon be on the receiving end of about 20 one page essays that I'll need to read and grade. I despise grading essays! I can't even imagine teaching English 101 with 250 students.

I was wondering the other day if there was anyone else on gradcafe that has dealt with PTSD and grad school. Mine is lifelong trauma rather than one isolated incident (I'm not sure if that even makes a difference when talking about PTSD), and I have serious problems staying focused, socializing, and sleeping. The stress during my last year of undergrad was SO bad that I've actually developed physical symptoms such as new, fun food intolerances and random rashes. I'm doing the therapy thing (no meds) and trying stress reduction and relaxation techniques, but it is still a constant struggle. What helped you the most?

Are you freaking kidding me? I know people harp on perfect scores, but they don't really mean much. You have top 10 scores. What you should be worring about is research experience and fit.

Have you looked at the DDRI? I think that one is more education based.

I can't believe that I am once again having trouble with a recommender. This time, it is for these grants. I have my other two recommenders lined up to write me fantastic references. And then there is my undergrad adviser (actually he was my second adviser). I chose him instead of my first adviser because his title holds some credit and because my current adviser advised me to do so. Well, it's been a week and I haven't heard jack. This wasn't uncommon in undergrad so I'm not that surprised. I am a little angry through. It is part of his job to complete these requests (of which he doesn't get many because the department is small). So, what say the board? Should I wait it out a couple more days? (I sent my request on Sunday.) Should I send a follow up email? (He's notorious for losing emails) Or should I just send a request to my first adviser? The reason I didn't choose him to begin with is because he's at the end of his career and hasn't really contributed publications for a decade or so. But he is more reliable and was absolutely thrilled with my undergrad work. Arg...