Sigaba

In the event you have a discussion about your desire to not be photographed and you follow the guidance outlined by TakeruK or rising_star, I strongly suggest you avoid saying anything along the lines of the two sentences above.

Thanks for the clarification, Riotbeard. In retrospect I may have (probably ) read the OP's question too broadly to include the unwritten social rules of graduate school, not just academic conferences. FWIW, I offered the specific guidance and reading recommendations to thedig13 because of the swagger issue. IMO, there simply is not enough of it among those members of this BB who have extraordinarily successful application seasons. Circling back to my revised understanding (?) of the question at hand what follows are two suggestions for not running afoul of two unwritten rules about food served at a conference.. Be very mindful of how you behave IRT food. If there's a SNAFU with a meal you paid for in advance, deal with it calmly and briefly. No matter how much money you may have paid for a meal that isn't there for you to eat, no matter how hungry the conference has made you (both physically and psychologically) act as if the miscue is no big deal. Stay focused on the task of getting to know other attendees. Settle accounts later. If you manage to keep your balance, someone may go the extra mile to get you a plate. (This happened to me.) As you eat or drink at a conference, do so in a way where you can quickly clear your mouth to ask or answer a question or to make a point. To be sure, you will likely be very hungry when it comes time to eat but you want to protect yourself from a situation in which one of the biggest names in your field asks you "What are you working on?" and all you can say is "NOM NOM NOM!" (Of course, this happened to someone else not named me. )

FWIW, while it is commonplace (popular) to attribute behavior such as that exhibited by your PI as "passive-aggressive," that is not what he was doing. The clinical definition of passive aggressive behavior more accurately correlates to malingering <<LINK>>. That is, by definition, your PI cannot exhibit "passive aggressive" behavior towards you because he's sitting in the cat-bird seat in your relationship with him. (If he really wants you out, you'll be gone before you get there.) On the other hand, if he has a habit of bitching, moaning, and defying--but ultimately complying with--the directives of those higher up in his food chain, then such behavior might qualify as "passive-aggressive." But beyond that, if we're going to shake our collective heads in disappointment at those academics at the CHE fora who take the professional low road, it is incumbent upon us not to follow in their footsteps by engaging in one of the most uncivil activities imaginable: putting on the couch individuals when we neither have the professional training nor the invitation to do so. Instead, it is much better to refer to such activity as "acting like a poo poo head" and to call a habitual malingerer by another, more applicable term: asshat. Er. Please pardon me for belaboring this point. I have had a dual hatted historian / clinical psychoanalyst bounce me off the walls enough times. But beyond that, the current wave of populism has helped to contribute to America's long established intertwined practices of anti-intellectualism / anti-professionalism. When we argue that behavior is pathological, we contribute to our own marginalization. YMMV. As for your cynicism, the reason I counsel against it is because it is in your best interests to maintain your relationship with your PI along its present trajectory.

@Riotbeard Hey, like, dude. What is the issue? The OP asked the following. Based upon that question, I provided information on how to learn more about those unwritten rules. Moreover, I think you didn't read my post carefully and/or are unfamiliar with the works I mentioned. In the case of the former, "plotter" and "backstabber" are your words, not mine. On the contrary, in my post, I indicate that once one goes beyond what is outdated and distasteful, there's remains a focus on moral and ethical thought and behavior as the springboard for social activity. In the case of the latter, the works I mentioned were suggestions for someone going into a new environment. If you hold to the notion that it is "weird" to suggest that a history student can learn something of practical, everyday value by reading, please do elaborate.

@mandarin.orange I'm glad that you got things worked out. Going forward, I urge you to do what you can to avoid looking into the well of cynicism when dealing with your PI. My reading of your initial posts was that the PI needed to find his new normal before he could get you funding, was trying to stay abreast of your situation, and was trying to get you to manage your expectations. MOO, the CHE fora is an echo chamber for academics with frustrated professional ambitions and maladaptive personality traits. Many of its members are examples of why increasing numbers of non academics in America hold the Ivory Tower in contempt. (In many cases, the contempt is pot, meet kettle.) If that BB's more strident and prolific posters are as keyed into things as they'd have readers believe, then why do they need an outlet for a continuous stream of anonymous bitching as opposed to focusing their time and energy on getting things done?

FWIW, I've seen papers that have been accepted for publication but have not yet gone to press listed on the CVs of established historians.

FWIW, I agree with GeoDUDE! and others who find the scenario described in the OP problematic. Confidentiality is vital to the integrity of LORs. For that reason, many professors will not write for a student who doesn't wave his/her right to view the letter. Allowing a student to draft substantial portions of a letter blurs a line that should be avoided. Disagree? Think about yourself as an established professional fifteen years from now. How much trust will you place in any LORs if you knew that it was commonplace that the person who signed the letter actually didn't write it? Would you be willing to invest your personal and professional reputation in the subject of that letter? An aside. I think some of you are being unduly combative towards each other and I think you should consider the advantages of toning it down. IMO, the appropriate response to a direct quote from an established professional academic is to provide contrasting quotes that advance the argument, not to attempt to belittle the messenger's POV with characterizations of "cherry picking" and "histrionics" and "nonsense." Additionally, I believe you are assuming that the process of awarding travel grants at your institution is the same as at the OP's. Do you have evidence that your assumption is sustainable? Might there be additional factors that have not yet been disclosed by the OP, or of which the OP is unaware? (For example, the specific configuration of departmental politics, professional rivalries, and personal relationships.) Are common practices at your institution in fact best practices or are they actually sources of controversy (i.e. grade inflation)? @bhr, what you did as an employer is not relevant to the discussion at hand -- the Ivory Tower plays by a different set of rules. While copypasta with a side of boilerplate may be a favorite combo in corporate America, many academics read for indications that the person who wrote a LOR does not, in fact, know the student or his/her work that well after all.

IMO the answer to your question is no. Research courses in graduate school are a part of your training as an aspiring professional academic history. Your CV should reflect what you've done with that training. If taking those extra research courses makes you a better candidate for a position, you should strive to show and prove it, e.g. the conference presentation and published paper. Also, I respectfully suggest that you not define your projects by page length. It isn't how many pages you write, but what you write on those pages and how well.

Hey, Ricardo-- IME working at two engineering firms, the work ethic of the public sector is vastly different than the work ethic of the Ivory Tower. The private sector rarely values knowledge for its own sake. The metrics determining the "bottom line" in the Ivory Tower don't center around profit loss statements. Unless your contact at Intel also has extensive experience as an academic, admissions committees may not give her LOR the same consideration as one written by a fellow academic.

Don't worry but be as proactive as possible. You want to end up working with the best mentoring professor available, in a course relevant to your interests, at a time that doesn't muck up your schedule. You may have a better chance getting that assignment if you lean forward rather than back. But what ever you do, don't worry. There's plenty of time for that later.

Do you deserve anything less than someone who will say to you "EEpa, I want YOU," even if that person doesn't know how to make things work or even if they will? (And really, who does?)

Hey, Danone. Do you really need a pack geared towards professionals? Yes, they tend to look great and be better made than packs geared towards students. However, they often lack the type of versatility you might want as a student: in particular, open mesh pockets for smaller items you frequently use, zippered pockets sized and placed just right for an extra layer, and larger pockets that can be STUFFED with books without raising concerns about damaging one's laptop. To give you an example, the Arcteryx Blade 24 holds a lot for work and looks at home in DTLA but it is almost useless in the library . In contrast, the similarly-sized Arcteryx Mantis looks...a bit out of place...in the office and it is very nifty in the stacks when I need to pull out a notebook, a jacket, or dive into a mesh pocket for an allergy pill.

I recommend that you also budget for clothes. As a new graduate student, you may have opportunities to participate in a variety of mixers, some hosted by professors. You'll definitely have opportunities to participate in department-related events. In many cases, you may be good to go with your everyday wear. However, it is better to have the ability to dress up and not need to than the reverse. I would also budget/plan for the graduate school equivalent of the vampiric zombie apocalypse: dead hard drive/fried motherboard at about the same time several assignments are due.

In your case, you are going to have at least three sets of rules. As a graduate student in history, you will have to learn the rules on how to ask questions, how to say "I don't know," how to say "I disagree," and when it is time to drink some STFU. As a graduate student in an academically elite institution, you will have to learn the rules on how to comport yourself as a member of an intellectually elite group. Members of such groups are expected to have a certain swagger, to be very competitive intellectually, and to demonstrate their intellectual skills socially as well as academically. This is to say that you'll not only feel pressure to be up to speed IRT the course materials, but also what is going on in America and the world as if your school is the center of the universe and its alumni are titans. As a graduate student at a socially elite institution, you will have to learn the unwritten rules of the dominant cohort. Beyond hoary traditions, (increasingly) anachronistic class snobbery, chauvinism centering around gender identity, cultural practices, and religious affiliations, you will encounter rules of the road that have been ingrained in some since their great grand parents went to prep school about the relationships among education, social awareness, knowledge, ethics, morality, and power. How does one from your background learn these rules? You can read books about those who have learned those rules written by individuals who have also lived by those rules. Examples include R.W. Winks's Cloak and Dagger, John Jay Osborn Jr.'s semi autobiographical novel The Paper Chase, John Morton Blum's The Republican Roosevelt, and Blum's memoir, A Life with History. You could also read works by those who, through their own study, have unraveled some of the mysteries. Kai Bird's dual biography of the Bundy brothers comes to mind. Additionally, you can contact your school's local alumni club and see if there's anyone who can offer some pointers. You might also profit from reading as many of New England Nat's posts as you can find. Notice how her posts show little, if any, graduate student angst--no poser syndrome for her. She acts like she's the real deal because knows she's the real deal. Notice how she generally gives guidance based only upon what she has done or knows as a verifiable fact. Notice how she's tied into her department and, from there, the larger profession. That's swagger. But also, you can wait until you get there and for a period of time--weeks, months, the first two semesters, ultimately it is your call)--concentrate on being The Grey Man who hears and sees everything but says almost nothing--except during office hours, when you ask well crafted questions. Unfortunately, though, you may be taught many of the rules by the harshest of instructors: personal experience. Maybe you'll get chewed out for cutting a path across a lawn. Or for making a snarky comment about public universities and state colleges. Or you might get some looks because you don't get a triple inside joke because you don't read this magazine or that newspaper. Or you may not grasp the connection between fellow student Jane Smith and Smith Hall until someone points it out to you. In many instances, you may be inclined to think "screw this bullshot--this is graduate school, not high school." But before settling for this perspective, I urge you to look at the faculty lists for the departments you would like to join down the line and consider the following questions. Isn't the Old Boys' Club a thing of the past? Don't individuals get hired because of their skills as historians and their historiographic points of view? Or are graduates of the top programs hiring each other because they share common social and cultural sensibilities after spending years breaking bread and shooting the breeze with their mentors--and each other? Stepping from the abstract to the concrete, IMO, you are breaking an unwritten social rule with your current profile. That is, it will be accurate to say that you're "already attending" in August, but for now you are in a liminal state.

The operative word was "may."

Are you talking to anyone in the department of history (e.g. Professors Liles and Morris)? Also, if the highlighted portion truly reflects your experiences, you may want to develop your research skills--if not also reconsider your attitude. FYI, a search on Google for "grad cafe forums history don't want academic job" yielded results that include the following:

Welcome to the Grad Cafe. In the event you get into a history graduate program, you will be judged from the first day on your ability to do research and to generate meaningful questions and thoughtful answers. I respectfully suggest that you use your time on this BB to develop those skills.

@schoolpsycherThe above statement is a dynamic that may prove a double edged knife when interacting with the older students. That is, they may not be able to empathize with you when relationships get rocky with professors even as they give you outstanding tactical guidance.

I recommend changing the highlighted to: I am writing to ask for your permission to take your class...this fall. The reason for the recommendation is that it allows you to cut right to the chase and to identify the "action item" for the recipient a bit more efficiently. Also, if the course has prerequisites, please consider writing a brief sentence or two in which you describe how your previous work may fulfill those requirements. As you wait for a reply, find ways to familiarize yourself with the bureaucratic / administrative steps that may follow. For example, if there are forms to fill out, make sure you have a couple of copies and that you've read the instructions carefully. This way, if the professor writes to you something along the way of "Okay, make it happen." you know what to do next.

I am referring to the OP's specific circumstances: married dad with young child and attending graduate school.

The commute to/from SF will cost a lot of time and energy. IMO, that "price" should be factored into the calculation of living off campus.

I think you're much in better shape than you realize. No matter how good one's ability to work with primary source materials, that skill is greatly diminished without the ability to place one's work within the context of ongoing debates. Moreover, engaging in a research project without first having a very good sense of how that project fits into a larger historiographical debate can lead to a work that, while impressive in its own right, might see established historians ask "So what?" (And I've seen this happen. But not to me. ) I recommend that you take the historiographic piece, find an aspect (or more) of the debate you address in that essay that either interests you or has been misunderstood or remains unexplored, Then, use primary source materials to flesh out your POV. Attempt to keep the revised essay the same length. As the project progresses, you'll trim / sharpen some of the historiographical points as you flesh out your own arguments. A small point: it is primary sources and secondary works, not secondary sources.

How is it an invasion of your privacy if you're being asked to hand over work seen by others? IRT the request, if you're interested to learn if it is appropriate, I recommend that you start with your current institution's policies on academic conduct. FWIW, I'm inclined to agree with telkanuru. If the professor's intent is to cut you a break, you'd be less uncertain about her motivation.