Catria

Please, a resource I would strongly consider would be mental health services as well. Perhaps a mental health issue belies either why you wanted a PhD in the first place or why you doubt yourself by now...

The reason why I mentioned PGS-D specifically was because I hold a Canadian masters... in which case I know there are Canadian supervisors that I would be able to work under, with a PGS-D in hand, that I wouldn't be able to otherwise. 
This means I have 2 years of PGS-D eligibility. If I start in Fall 2017, and I obtain it for 2017 I will have 3 years, but if I obtained it in 2018 then I have 2 years of PGS-D.
The decision to drop out was made before NSERC awards for future application cycles even entered the equation. I know fixing the kind of mental health issues I am afflicted with is a long-term enterprise.

Keep in mind that I am a Quebec resident (no need for a F-1 visa but need to take TOEFL).
 
https://consanguinephysics.wordpress.com/the-master-list-of-costs-incurred/
 
Applied to 12 schools for physics... all amounts are in $US unless otherwise specified.
 
Physics GRE: $150
General GRE: $185
TOEFL: $240
 
GRE score reports: 12 @ $27 apiece = $324
TOEFL score reports: 12 @ $19 apiece = $228
 
Transcript translations: $CAN200
Hardcopy transcripts: 5 @ $CAN11 (the fifth one will be sent to Minnesota in due time but not yet)
 
Application fees: $760
Washington University in St. Louis: $45 Notre Dame: $75 Dartmouth: $50 Minnesota: $95 Michigan: $90 Princeton: $90 UPenn: $80 Tufts: $75 UChicago: $55 Columbia: $105 SEVIS fee: $200
 
F-1 Visa fee (if applicable): $160
 
Spent almost $2,000...

Introduction to Particle Cosmology:
 
Grand unification era Inflation Baryogenesis Electroweak symmetry breaking Hadron and lepton eras Nucleosynthesis Prerequisites: some knowledge of quantum field theory at the level of Peskin & Schroeder Chapters 1-7

I expect it to be different from STEM (Vanderbilt once said that 2/3-3/4 of its applicant pool for the physics PhD was made up of internationals, with 1/2+ of the total applicant pool that came from either China or India, the data is a little dated though), but one has to wonder how many internationals apply to English programs.
 
Take Northwestern for example. Since NWU is a private school, top-20 even, one would expect Northwestern not to favor US residents over equally-qualified internationals on the basis of residency status, and to be rather highly sought-after by internationals. Yet NWU enrolls either 0 or 1 international a year. Either NWU is highly protectionistic for a private school, international applicants are weaker on average vs. domestic applicants, or international applicants are just not that common to begin with.
 
http://www.tgs.northwestern.edu/documents/program-statistics/E25PH_adm_enr.pdf

I expect it to be different from STEM (Vanderbilt once said that 2/3-3/4 of its applicant pool for the physics PhD was made up of internationals, with 1/2+ of the total applicant pool that came from either China or India, the data is a little dated though), but one has to wonder how many internationals apply to English programs.
 
Take Northwestern for example. Since NWU is a private school, top-20 even, one would expect Northwestern not to favor US residents over equally-qualified internationals on the basis of residency status, and to be rather highly sought-after by internationals. Yet NWU enrolls either 0 or 1 international a year. Either NWU is highly protectionistic for a private school, international applicants are weaker on average vs. domestic applicants, or international applicants are just not that common to begin with.
 
http://www.tgs.northwestern.edu/documents/program-statistics/E25PH_adm_enr.pdf

I know for a fact that some schools will ask you to re-send if you do not submit an application within X months of submitting supporting materials.
 
At Tufts, for example you have to submit an application within 3 months of sending your GRE scores, or else.

Any reason why, in this horrible market, state regionals or other non-RU/VH 4-years would assume that top-20, top-10 even, grads (from Ivies or not) would likely use a job at a non-RU/VH to land a job at a RU/VH once they're up for tenure? Wouldn't this horrible market force them to hold on to any job they can find?
 
 
Although particle cosmology is one of the more hierarchical subfields within physics, it's less hierarchical than English because so many particle cosmologists leave academia altogether (I-banking seems to hire particle cosmologists, and sometimes tech industries, although neither specifically hire in particle cosmo, and I-banking is definitely more hierarchical than STEM academia in general)
 
It's not uncommon for particle cosmologists to be hired with hundreds of citations, a large number of papers...
 
 
Based on our heavy usage of QFT...

I would say, retake the GRE, study properly and then you may apply to schools other than UDel and UNL...

Good thing particle cosmology isn't as elitist as English is, as far as the necessity of holding a degree from a top school to land a TT job is concerned...

Good thing particle cosmology isn't as elitist as English is, as far as the necessity of holding a degree from a top school to land a TT job is concerned...

I can't help but turn up with critical theory when thinking about the system of prestige, and how, like capital itself, it reifies its own values constantly. I think prestige is total horseshit, but its dominance over the social and economic landscape means I can either allow myself to be interpellated into its own value system and choose to pursue prestige, or I can be swept into the margins and crushed. That sucks!

One would have assumed that, at public schools, even out-of-state domestics cost more than in-staters, and then the difference between a domestic out-of-stater and an international is not nearly as great as the difference between an in-stater and an out-of-stater, assuming that there is no international differential between an international and a domestic out-of-stater. At privates, all students cost the same.
 
But, in some fields (especially true of STEM fields; these guys are usually much less abundant in the humanities) Chinese and Indian students are at a disadvantage over equally-qualified students from other countries. Dr. Larrondo once said that Chinese and Indian kids sometimes tend to spend an entire postbac on preparing for tests and, in the Chinese case, some masters programs really amount to a whole 2 years of test-prep, and that recs from these countries often sound similar from a student to another (Rob Knop). And that's just the honest kids; Chinese kids have another strike against them: if they are honest, oftentimes their personal statements will show a large discrepancy with their GRE/TOEFL scores.

Even though many a pre-med tried their hands at research (and, of course, clinical volunteering), if only because med school adcoms seem to look at research experience favorably (the pre-meds I know can go to great lengths to accomplish their ultimate objective) research really is the only thing that can realistically cause pre-meds to consider a PhD in a biomedical science as a backup plan to med school.
 
Then again, if some MSc programs in the biomedical sciences are used by premeds in an attempt to bolster their dossiers for med school, are they funded? Do they come with a thesis? Or are they otherwise used to reinforce the dossiers of PhD hopefuls?
 
One last thing: why not use the MCAT (or any other test specifically designed for healthcare professions, such as the PCAT or the DAT) as an admissions test for PhD programs in biomedical sciences?
 
If I were the head of a department offering a PhD in a biomedical science, I would probably allow the use of such test scores on an experimental basis. That is, if tests designed for aspiring healthcare professionals truly were no better than the GRE at detecting biomedical scientific talent, then their use would be discontinued, but that wouldn't mean much then. In the event, however, that, say, the MCAT was proven to be a better predictor than the GRE is, in the context of biomedical graduate programs, then the GRE would no longer be required.

Even though many a pre-med tried their hands at research (and, of course, clinical volunteering), if only because med school adcoms seem to look at research experience favorably (the pre-meds I know can go to great lengths to accomplish their ultimate objective) research really is the only thing that can realistically cause pre-meds to consider a PhD in a biomedical science as a backup plan to med school.
 
Then again, if some MSc programs in the biomedical sciences are used by premeds in an attempt to bolster their dossiers for med school, are they funded? Do they come with a thesis? Or are they otherwise used to reinforce the dossiers of PhD hopefuls?
 
One last thing: why not use the MCAT (or any other test specifically designed for healthcare professions, such as the PCAT or the DAT) as an admissions test for PhD programs in biomedical sciences?
 
If I were the head of a department offering a PhD in a biomedical science, I would probably allow the use of such test scores on an experimental basis. That is, if tests designed for aspiring healthcare professionals truly were no better than the GRE at detecting biomedical scientific talent, then their use would be discontinued, but that wouldn't mean much then. In the event, however, that, say, the MCAT was proven to be a better predictor than the GRE is, in the context of biomedical graduate programs, then the GRE would no longer be required.

For this reason, one might wonder whether the graduate sociology applicant pools have collapsed like graduate humanities applicant pools have...

So one has to wonder whether the applicant pool in the social sciences has collapsed the same way humanities' applicant pools have (English, history, philosophy all alluded to such a collapse this year, here on TGC)... Or, at the very least, political science.

For this reason, one might wonder whether the graduate sociology applicant pools have collapsed like graduate humanities applicant pools have...

I hope not, if the collapse in the applicant pool alluded to earlier is real...

#971, #1518 are definitely stuff I experienced, while #847 graces the door of my office (and 3 more pertaining to free food, alongside others).

It takes me 10 cookies to substitute a meal using seminar food...

However, the job market for MBAs is highly hierarchical. Top-7 programs (or sometimes called the Magic 7; Harvard, Stanford, MIT Sloan, Columbia, NWU Kellogg, Chicago Booth, UPenn Wharton) grant you access to contacts and opportunities even, say, Brown Prime (Brown Prime isn't AACSB-accredited, however) or Berkeley Haas won't.
 
And getting into a top-7 program requires not simply having post-graduation work experience but also that said work experience has had impressive progression.

I am not a humanities guy, but I can definitely feel how the "crapshootiness" (please excuse my poor choice of a word) of PhD admissions processes would compel people to apply to large numbers of PhD programs, and hoping for just one acceptance. And said processes can render people neurotic. My budget limited me to 12 applications; I would probably have submitted more if I had the money (would have applied to Case Western, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Caltech, UCD and Arizona State as well)

If you are staying in UG for another year, then try to get research experience...

You might want to earn a good chemistry GRE score for what you want... and pay attention to whether the university is public or private; it is usually harder to get into US public universities than similarly-ranked privates for international students because of the cost of the tuition waivers associated with TA/RA positions.