doefficient

Woohoo: after a few carefully worded e-mails to NSERC, I got my PGSD2 changed to a PGSD3!!!
It's unlikely that there's anyone else in the situation that I was in which that allowed this to happen, but hey just in case: IF YOU CHANGE PROGRAMS DURING YOUR PHD, IT RE-STARTS THE CLOCK FOR PGSD3 ELIGIBILITY!!!!
My example: I went to PhD straight from bachelor's meaning the cutoff for PGSD3 vs PGSD2 was having completed 24 months of the program as of Dec 31, 2016. I started my PhD in Applied Physics in October 2014, which meant that as of Dec 31, 2016, I'd been at my school for 27 months, which made both myself and NSERC believe that I was only eligible for PGSD2. However, after 5 months of being in the Applied Physics PhD program I changed to the Physics PhD program (which at my school is a totally disjoint program from Applied Physics, run by a different administrative division) in March 2015. Two days ago I realized that because of this, I had actually only spent 22 months in the program for which I am requesting funding! Explained this to NSERC and they upgraded my award. The lady that I was in contact with was extremely kind and patient, which is totally the opposite of my experience dealing with NSERC when I had application problems last year.
TL;DR: If you've changed programs at some point in your PhD and you were given a PGSD2 this year, do the homework and see if you're actually eligible for the extra year!!

Do graduate students have to do whatever research is available, regardless of their interests? If you've had a harder time than you thought getting into grad school, do you suck it up and do whatever you have to do to get your degree at wherever you're accepted? Is it wrong for me to be picky about which lab I join when it's hard to find a lab of interest that has funding?
I'm a masters student and I just finished my first year of grad school. I have spent the last year in a lab doing research I'm not that interested in, and my advisor and I have just recently decided that I'm not a good fit. She says it's not due to my performance; we just don't communicate very well and our work styles are too different (i.e. I'm a perfectionist and can be too cautious, hence I work slowly). However, I'm actually not that upset that I don't have an advisor right now, because I didn't actually want to be in her lab. 
The question is, do I try to join another lab at my own institution, even if it means that once again I'm researching a topic I'm not interested, or do I try to transfer to another institution where I can actually have a passion for my research?
For years, well at the beginning of my, I knew that no matter what career direction, I wanted to go to graduate school and study a topic that I was really, truly interested. My dream was to be PASSIONATE about my research; not do lab work as a chore, but because I genuinely wanted to. 
However... my graduate life turned out to be nothing like I hoped it would be. Despite having a BS in Molecular Biology with a GPA of 3.45 and GRE scores of 156 (verbal), 160 (quantitative) and 4.5 (essay), I didn't get into school nearly as easily as I hoped I would. I applied to ten different schools, and only got into one (my safety school... and my last choice). Some schools I knew I wouldn't get into, but most I felt were right up my alley and suited my interests. I had already spent two years out of school getting research experience to strengthen my resume, but I really started to resent my job and didn't want to take any more time off, so I decided to enroll in my safety school.
Sadly, it turns out that my advisor of choice didn't actually have the funding I thought he did, so I had to settle for an advisor who, despite being incredibly nice, patient, and understanding, she was not doing the kind of research that I wanted to do. Also, she did not have enough funding for a full assistantship, so for this past year I've had to do work on the side in order to supplement my income, and there's no sign that that would ever change until I graduated. After a year study, she could tell that I was not a good fit for her lab. Still, she's offered to write a positive letter of recommendation should I want it, and I haven't actually been dismissed from her lab, so I'd like to think that that's a good sign.
The fact of the matter is, I'm just not satisfied with where I'm going to school. It's a nice school in a quaint little town, but I just can't find any professors whose work truly interests me.
I know that my credentials aren't THAT impressive, I know that there are literally THOUSANDS of applicants out there that have better grades and more research experience than me, and I know that applying to grad school isn't AT ALL easy, but I guess I still thought that there was room in the academic world for me to pursue my own interests.
So now I've got a dilemma. One choice is take a semester off (meanwhile doing some form of work to pay the bills) while waiting to see if I can get into a lab of interest at a different institution next spring, all at the risk of once again not getting into a school of interest.
The second choice is that I try to find a professor at my current school who already has funding, and do whatever research is available so I can finish my degree sooner than later.
Anyone have any experience with a situation like this?
I know that this is a long post, and I appreciate those of you who took the time to read it all the way through (pant, pant, cough, lol) but I'd really love some feedback, here. 
Thanks.

Hello everyone!
I`m applying to Vanier CGS 2016-2017. Is there any other applicants here? If we could count with the help (some tips, guidelines, etc) of those who are already accepted that would be great.
Thanks!

Disclaimer: I can only speak to my own experiences, and these are shaped in part by being in a well-funded science program at a top university. I can’t speak to the issues I talk about below in the context of humanities, though I imagine things may be worse (?).


 
Grad school as a student from a low-income background can be difficult, even for me, someone in the sciences who gets paid a great stipend that means I don’t have to worry about accruing any debt. It’s just kind of an odd cultural situation.

Honestly, things were much easier in undergrad. I attended a very small SLAC that prided itself on being inclusive and diverse. It had its problems, but as a low-income student I felt really welcomed by the no-cash campus and low-income-specific student groups. Even if we had problems with the administration, at least we weren’t alone. I held several jobs, but I didn’t have to. I just tend to be someone who squirrels away money ‘just in case.’ When it came to grad school, I was accepted to what is arguably the best school in my field. I would be attending for free and would even be paid a living wage stipend, and I didn’t even have to teach! I thought having the same stipend would even the playing field even more between myself and my peers. Or so I thought.

I didn’t realize that in grad school that it’s common to receive significant financial support from your parents. No offense intended if you happen to be one of those students; I just had no clue that that was commonplace. Because I got a full-ride scholarship to undergrad, and did research internships (or other random things) during summer, my parents haven’t had to really support me in a serious way for years. I recognize that I was incredibly lucky to have received those privileges and it’s not nearly so easy for others who just miss cutoffs for financial aid, or who go to a less well-funded college. I realize my experience is nowhere near the norm, but what surprised me the most when I got to grad school is how every other first year grad student seemed to think that their life was the norm. For example, my program is small, but of the 15 or so of us in my year, I think everyone has parents that are professionals: doctors, lawyers, or professors/scientists. One guy even published a paper recently with his dad. For comparison, my dad works in a factory and my mom didn’t work while she was raising myself and my sister. My set of experiences are very different from my peers. Not necessarily better or worse, but so different that it's often hard to relate. I'm pretty candid about my background, but I can tell it makes others uncomfortable at times. Sometimes the differences make me feel uncomfortable too. 

For example, some other classmates and I went shopping together. I am very money-conscious and enjoy window shopping, but a lot of the time won’t get anything unless I feel like it’s a good deal. My grad school friends bought new winter coats and boots and used their parents’ credit cards to pay. I’m not bitter about it; if I could I would totally do that as well. I just can’t relate. And I don't think they could relate to me either. I just loaned my family $2000 for my sister to pay for college because my parents couldn’t afford the expected parental contribution. Loaning my parents money was a very odd thing for me, but whenever I try to talk about those kinds of experiences, I usually get blank stares or weird concerned looks. I just wish I knew someone who has been in my shoes; someone who I could share these experiences with. 

I was wondering if anyone else is in a similar boat, and if you are, how did you find people like you/relate to your peers who seem to come from totally different worlds?

Received email about status update and bam!! Got off the waitlist and was offered NSERC YAY!!!! 

I got offered by Lakehead, alternate by Saskatchewan, and still not posted for Manitoba. I will be declining for Saskatchewan when I get off the waitlist... I will not be attending there. If anyone was posted for Manitoba, let me know as it would be good to know if others got an answer there while I what to find out what they say...
 
Two years ago I had also applied. I was declined at the other schools but wait listed for Manitoba. I was offered off of the waitlist in around the 7th of May. Do not lose hope to those that were wait listed, you have a good shot to get the offer. Remember that you are still receiving offers as those on the waitlist might also decline... eg. If no one declined on the first round until the 21st day and all but 10 accepted the award and you are 11th on the list, you might not get an offer until 42 days after April 1st. Everyone has the opportunity to hold the offer for 21 days. Be patient!!!

Thanks for the encouragement. Really hoping a definitive answer comes along soon because waiting until Jan 2017 seems too unbearable. 

Sorry, I hadn't seen that you found the answer before my post! You have a better change at CGS-D now that you've gotten CGS-M so don't count yourself out! Congrats!!

"In order to take advantage of the full value and duration of the award, award recipients who are already enrolled in their program of study are encouraged to take up their award on the earliest available start date; otherwise, it is possible that they may complete their degree before the end of the award. In this case, they will be required to terminate the award (refer to the section Termination of Award)."
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Students-Etudiants/Guides-Guides/CGSMAward-BESCMaward_eng.asp, under "Start Date"

Also, guys, I think this comic routine kind of summarizes the applicant-grad school relationship. They rush you and rush you to apply and then immediately go silent once you submit your app. It's right down to the detail that some folks get fed up by how School A treats them and instead opt for 2nd choice School B (in this case, we'll call it "Brian").
 

There's also this article that's relevant:
 
Stenstrom, D. M., Curtis, M., & Iyer, R. (2013). School Rankings, Department Rankings, and Individual Accomplishments What Factors Predict Obtaining Employment After the PhD?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(2), 208-217

While the website I posted only showed schools from the US, the same rules apply in Canada as stated by the Canadian Psychological Association. The policy by the CPA has been in place since 1979 and states that:
Departments will endeavour to make offers of admission and/or support to applicants before April 1st.
Applicants have until April 15th to accept an offer of admission.
After April 15, offers will be made only to applicants who state that they are not committed to
another department. 
If you would like to read it for yourself you can examine the link below which will connect you to the CPA Graduate Guide but make no mistake, all schools in Canada and the US must give applicants until April 15th to accept or decline an offer. Therefore, if any school pressures you to make a decision before April 15th you can tell them you will be taking all the time you want because that is your right. 
 
http://www.cpa.ca/docs/File/Publications/Graduate%20Guide%202010-2011%20Final%20Copy.pdf

They wouldn't have called you in for an interview if your application wasn't strong in the first place otherwise, it'd just be a waste of everyone's time. I didn't for this particular school because I know why I didn't get the offer. It was a lack of fit with the research. But I would definitely advise you to ask for feedback. It will give you things to work on for when you have to interview and deal with other schools. 

Not notifying post-interview is trashy.

Well thanks, it's all a very confusing sort of fiasco, this stuff. Makes me want to go get a job and forget about it sometimes.

I never saw the Hobbit but that macro cracked me up, lol.
 
TBL, I think you were the one wondering whether a minor in quant would do the same thing re: flexibility for finding work. It definitely can. Like I mentioned I work in a methods & stats center with a bunch of quant psychs. What I didn't go into is that quite a few of them actually have a PhD in developmental psychology with a minor in applied methods (or a master's in applied stats). One just got hired as a methodological professor in a social science department; she's spent years doing quant psych research and co-wrote The book on a widely-used technique. Another was a methodological professor for a few years before returning to the center (for personal reasons). A third just got several interviews for methodological positions and is waiting to hear back.
 
Also if you look at some of the big quant psychs in the field you'd be surprised to find out what some of them have their PhDs in. Todd Little's PhD is in developmental psychology. Patrick J. Curran's PhD is in clinical psychology (he did a postdoc in applied statistics). Kenneth Bollen actually has a PhD in sociology (he minored in math in college). And Andrew Hayes' PhD is in social and personality psychology (from his CV it looks like he started doing quant research towards the end of his PhD or shortly thereafter).

Does anyone know anything about the value of the ranking of a school? Like, a top 50 psych program vs. one that doesn't make the top 100? As far as getting hired as a professor after earning your PhD, the name/quality of the school will matter, right?

I used to find these questions obnoxious, but now I understand better why they ask.
 
If they ask where else you applied, they're trying to suss out two things. First, how focused you are in terms of interests. For example, applying to all clinical programs shows more focused interest in clinical than applying to clinical and social and developmental programs. Because subfields have very different approaches, it can be a little confusing when someone applies to several different types of programs. Second, whether you're actually a good fit. For example, applying to all research-oriented clinical programs shows interest in research, whereas applying to some research-oriented and some practice-oriented clinical programs does not. Also, some people just apply to all the programs in a geographical area, and those programs usually are VERY different from each other.
 
If they ask where else you have interviews (or more directly how highly you're ranking them), they are trying to get a feel for how likely you are to accept an offer. It's not actually about program ego or whatever (most of the time ), but usually about funding issues. Many programs are allowed to extend a certain number of offers, but are not allowed to have a waitlist. If they don't get one of the named students, they just don't get a student. Add in the calculations necessary to determine which faculty get students, and you have a lot of strategic guessing happening. Faculty member A has a stronger candidate than Faculty member B, but Candidate B is more likely to accept an offer than Candidate A, etc.
 
How to answer these questions? For the former, no need to be shy about giving them the names of a few of the other programs to which you applied. No need to give them all the names if you don't want to; pick the ones that are most consistent with how you are trying to present yourself as a fit. For the latter, again no need to tell them all of the names if you don't want to, but it's fine if you do. If they invited you to interview they already think you're a strong candidate, which means they won't be surprised that you have other interviews, but they also know that the numbers game is crazy, so they won't be alarmed if they are your only one. In some ways, the latter is easier for them, because they have a better sense of your likelihood of accepting their offer.
 
I'm not sure I would tell any program where they are in your own ratings UNLESS they are actually your first choice, in which case you should absolutely tell them. It's not dating - it's okay to tell 'em you love 'em (appropriately, of course) on the first meeting . You can instead say that you are extremely enthusiastic about their program and you have decided to finish all of your interviews before ranking your preferences.

I've treated this whole open house thing as an excuse for overdue shopping for boots, clothes, bags etc. Now if I can just put as much effort into preparing for this thing academically...

I used to love my weekends.  Now I find myself waiting for Monday and the possibility of some news... any news.  

I am not coping well with the waiting anxiety at all. I'm currently waiting to hear back from a program for which I interviewed a week and a half ago. I know for sure that the decisions are coming out this week. In a normal time scale, 4 days is nothing, but in "hopeful PhD student" time, 4 days seems like an agonising eternity. I've already overanalysed my interviews to death and have pretty much convinced myself I need to brace for a rejection. Funnily enough, right after the interviews I felt they'd actually gone alright. I was even quite happy that I had felt relaxed enough to share a few laughs with my first interviewer. Now after reading some posts on GradCafe, I'm starting to think that was a huge mistake because the other applicants probably used all their time convincing their interviewers why they were great. And all I've got going for me is... I'm a good conversationalist?   
 
Also, anyone have any definitive answers to what it means when a prof says: "All the best!"? 

My 17 year old daughter decided to share a piece of 'wisdom' with me..."Worry is like a rocking chair.  You have something to do, but you don't get anywhere."  I laughed and told her I would post it on this thread. 

What? All of these clinical programs are masters, and all of them have POIs.

That doesn't stop me from checking my updates folder in Gmail or my spam folder every ten minutes. Or looking for the blue blinking light on my phone.

I like to play a game called "how long can I wait before checking my email".  So far the record to beat is two hours.... 
 
This is the worst.