Sigaba

@steak99 welcome to the GradCafe. Please note that many, if not most, questions have been kicked around in past application seasons. Using the search function is a good way to get a running start on generating answers. To get you started...

There's a fourth possibility, albeit unlikely. The Powers That Be have measured the risks of COVID-19 against the benefits of scoring better on KPI that are being used to determine future levels of internal and external funding for either the graduate school or the history department. In this scenario, there's an assumption that if they have to shut things down for the next flare up of COVID-19, that the graduate students will figure out how to work harder and get finished faster because they're a cut above previous classes. And during a COVID-19 lockdown they can be exploited as cheap RA labor.

Oh! The cynicism! Another take is that programs that are not as highly ranked as they would like understand that they have the opportunity to get graduate students that would otherwise end up at Happyland University. And then exploit them as cheap TA labor.

Hi, @futurespeechpath1 I am sorry that you've had a rough experience. Please consider taking some time today to relax and rest after you take down your post on FB as you were told. (And you were definitely told to take down the post.) My two cents are that if the bolded paragraph accurately represents what you posted on Facebook, the comment could reasonably be taken as criticism, even "bad mouthing." I think that it would be worth your time to figure out why. IMO, you are receiving pretty good support from the dean and clinic director. They've told you that you're in CLM territory, they've advised you of the risk, and they've proposed a corrective action that gets you back on track. (They did not walk you through why they find your post controversial. I think that they should have.) Also, because they hold positions of authority over you, they cannot and are not exhibiting "passive aggressive behavior." They provided strong guidance in a format that you don't like. The challenge you face is to acknowledge how you feel, to accept the legitimacy of those feelings, and then use your intellect to figure out why the post went so sideways for you, what steps you can take to make things right, and what the dean and the director are teaching you. Here's a FWIW disclosure. I've been in situations like the one you're experiencing a "few times." I've been cut a lot of slack because people higher up in the food chain understand that my heart is generally in the right place, even when I'm putting both feet in my mouth.

Welcome to the grad cafe. Here are some threads that may help you start the process of finding answers to your questions.

I disagree with @feralgrad's point about mentioning the faculty's aesthetics not matching yours. The comment could prompt questions that don't serve you well. "How does @unfortunate ith know the faculty after less than one semester?" "Is @unfortunate ith actually talking trash about ...?" Three years is a long time to be in a situation that's not all one wants. However, before making a change, I recommend that you ask yourself if changing programs will absolutely give you the relief you want? How can you make sure that you're not going to go from working with one asshat to working with many asshats? IRT the professor's casual racism, I am going to relay a comment I received from a mentor when I mentioned someone's objectionable views of racial difference. He said, "Everyone's a racist. Saying someone's a racist is like saying the air has oxygen." It's an observation I hold close when I think about the impact of racism and race relations on my everyday life, and the state of America.

I am not sure she didn't give you actionable advice. By my reading of your post, she has suggested to you that your manage your expectations for the schools on your list and to cast a broader net to include programs where you might have better odds for earning an offer of admission. In the event you ask her for more support, I suggest you phrase your requests for comments on how you can make yourself a more competitive applicant. Try to keep the conversation centered around skill development. Also, please keep in mind that one hears "no" a lot in doctoral programs. Often, the "no" comes from individuals who are not generally supportive. Sometimes, "no" comes from those who have your best interests in mind. The challenge is figuring out the meaning of the "no" and deciding upon the level of effort one wants to make to turn that "no" into a "yes." (And ultimately, that may require telling someone "no." As in "Yes, I've heard your 'no,' but no, I'm going to do it my way...")

The craft has almost always has favored those who could afford to think about the past and to gather primary source materials and to purchase secondary works. Now, I think technology levels the field a bit, but this opinion is provincial. As an Americanist, I'm floored by the ever-expanding range of digitized government documents and archival sources freely available to all. The financial hurdles for access to journals are manageable. From a computing standpoint, memory, processing power, and software are inexpensive "force multipliers." The internet makes access to "how to" knowledge a bit more democratic as well. To be clear, my comments should not be taken as advocacy for the "pull yourself up by your boot straps" mentality that wrongly reduces good fortune, random chance, and misfortune to a lack of motivation. I'm attempting to encourage aspiring graduate students to think of ways to use available resources creatively and ambitiously. Flexibility may also prove crucial -- a writing sample that makes use of what's available may prove more beneficial in the short run than one that suffers from lack of primary sources even though it's closer to one's research interests.

I agree. And at the same time I augur that there will those students who figure out how to use available, but limited resources and the COVID-19 related restrictions to do excellent work.

Is snark going to help you in an academic discussion when someone disagrees with your views on your area of interest or is familiar with secondary works that you've not had the opportunity to consult?

The picture in my reply did not survive posting. My point is that when you posted your query, you had already heard from OSU ("Location: Buckeyeland").

@coffeehum, the ability to read between the lines will be pivotal to your success in graduate school.

This professor is showing you a great deal of respect by "bleeding" all over your drafts. The detailed comments are an indication that he's treating you like a peer and/or that he's attempting to mentor you. The challenge you face is to acknowledge how you feel then to put those feelings aside so that you can wrestle with his recommended changes. (Easier said than done! I once got so worked up over some coaching I received that the departmental chair took me to lunch so he could calm me down. It's not a good essay, he said.) Do what you can to understand how the recommended changes improve your work and give you an opportunity to grow as a scholar and, maybe, a person as well. At the same time, do what you can to develop a sense of where you want to draw the line -- are points where you want to stick to your initial approach? If so, how would you explain your position to your professor. What will you do if he insists that you make the recommended changes? (Here, I recommend that you learn from my experience -- do not say yes or no right away. Say something along the lines of "This is a lot of food for thought..." and then give yourself time to figure what you really want to do. The big picture here is not pleasing someone you may respect or admire, but to develop your sensibilities as a professional academic.) To address your question, I've been on both sides of this dynamic. Long story cut short, while I'm very conflicted about my experiences and my choices as a graduate student, I know I'm much better off from having a couple of professors willing to kick my ass up and down the hallways and stand on my head during office hours. The professors who leaned in and helped me improve my critical thinking and writing skills to the point where I could earn jobs in vastly different industries.

To me, it is odd that you seek to discredit 1.2 million posts written over many years because the posts are on an "anonymous internet forum" while, at the same time, you offer opinions on this application season anonymously. And it's also a bit odd that you say you have no idea who end users are even though much can be gleaned through reading of others' posts. To be fair, at least 2,405 of those 1.2 million posts are YMMV but then there are still the posts of old hands who have moved on as well as those of senior members. IMO, these oddities beg two (rhetorical) questions. Why participate at the Grad Cafe if the only opinions that matter to you are yours or those that align with your views? Also, if you're so "at peace" with your decision, why are you so reluctant to take a look around?

A recommendation. Please do what you can to avoid using words like "every", "all," "always," and "never" when describing your findings of a literature review. By using such determiners, you can paint yourself in a corner that could be easily avoided. All a disinterested party has to do is to find one paper that looks at enrollment patterns during the Great Recession and your credibility takes a hit. https://www.cgsnet.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/R_ED2009.pdf A fellow graduate student or, worse, a professor that wants to use you as a chew toy could additionally point to subsequent studies and reports from the Council of Graduate Schools and academics that look at enrollment rates by discipline, year over year. As a rule of thumb, it is "always" safer to qualify one's findings. "Based upon my cursory search of available studies..." "The provisional findings of my preliminary research suggest..."

You may benefit from taking a very deep dive into older threads centering around the "why" question (if not also non-traditional students) and/or reading extensively posts by members of the GradCafe who posted prolifically in seasons past. Such a dive may reveal that your aspirations are similar to those who eventually reached the limits of their endurance and to others who reached their goals. The purpose of this recommendation is to guide you to information that will enable you to benefit from the experiences of others--the "received wisdom" of this community.

@polsciguy88 is asking a different question than the ones you're answering, @DrGonzzo The question "why?" is visited almost every season at the grad cafe in one fora or another. (Also, the rules for positioning oneself in modern America are very much in flux.)

I recommend that you do your due diligence on all three so that you have a sense of alternatives. One can go to a specific program to work with a specific professor only learn the hard way that the professor really does not care about graduate students. At all. (Or so I've heard.) #NOTBITTER.

Please make sure to read very carefully the fine print of your graduate school applications as well as the relevant policies of the programs, schools, and colleges (universities) you want to attend. You want to make sure that omitting facts will not be considered the same as lying. Or, at the very least, understand your risk for omitting facts if you decide to go that route.

Were I in your situation, I'd double check the fine print about having a job while receiving funding from your program. If outside employment is technically allowed, I would reach out to interested parties, including the DGS, to see how the Powers That Be feel about graduate students with funding having outside jobs. (The point here is that the rules aren't always the rules of the road.) IRT the shop, after you've gotten the green light on having outside employment, I recommend that you look them up to see if they're still in business. If they aren't, you will know why they didn't respond. If they're still around, give them a call.

FWIW... https://grad.jhu.edu/apply/admission-privacy-policy/ https://gradschool.princeton.edu/policies/rescinding-offer-admission https://gsas.harvard.edu/admissions-policies/rescinding-admissions IMO, I think that you should reconsider your practice of making comments that suggest you have absolute knowledge of how every program and graduate school conducts its business.

Non disclosure is not without risks if: one consents to a background check that goes beyond transcripts; Imagine someone who performs background checks and is worried about losing a job because of COVID-19 and decides to prove his value by really leaning into his work and checking and re-checking every fact. a school has a code of ethics that hold students accountable for conduct before enrolling; the very act of non disclosure could be deemed as not within an institution's accepted standards of behavior one admits to the misconduct later and the new information gives professors and others the opportunity to reconsider their opinion of the student. a professor could conclude "I'd never have worked with this person had I known..." So, OP, if you decide to go the non disclosure route, I recommend that you first read and reread all the "fine print" you can find related to each school's policies on background checks, full disclosure in the application process, student conduct, and, maybe, a department's position on academic misconduct. If non disclosure works, as a graduate student, and later, as a professional academic, do not mention the incident to anyone with whom you don't have a legally privileged relationship. ("Everything is discoverable," is a key lesson of risk management training in the private sector.) And DO NOT cultivate a reputation as a firebrand when it comes to academic integrity. This is to say, when it's time to do your job and bust someone for academic dishonesty, do it without fanfare. Finally, you might consider the benefits of doing something about your sense of shame. You made a mistake, you have learned your lesson, you've paid the price, (and may continue to do so). Do not let a mistake of your youth become a burden that puts you in positions where you can be emotionally or psychologically compromised.

For now, without bending over backwards, could you find a topic that will be less controversial, may provide context for your proposed topic down the line, and raise fewer concerns during the upcoming application season? For example, could you as a graduate student, see yourself researching violence against women in Japanese literature--is there an uptick in violence that coincides with contemporaneous feminist movements in Japan? Then, maybe after you get tenure, you could return to this topic.

I think that if you were to spend time getting to know the culture of this BB a bit more you'd understand that these kinds of comments are not appropriate here.

^This guidance is golden. I received a similar note from a professor who was something of a big deal but it didn't really resonate at the time. I would not ask a professor about the GRE requirements. IME, the question may come across as the dreaded "Is this going to be on the midterm?" question some undergraduates invariably ask when a historian is leaning into an important point. Also, you never know when you might be dealing with an academic who has the mindset "I took the GRE, so why shouldn't you?"