eucalyptus

I had a prof from a UC psych department tell me that although she thought my research idea was great, it was "virtually impossible" to get in as an international student this year, unless I was bringing my own funding.

I used to be in Cognitive Science (and had to explain what it was all the time) but my Masters is in Psych. The conversation I have now usually goes something like: A: "Ooh, psychology. You're psychoanalyzing me right now, aren't you?" B: "Well, I study monkeys, so yes I am!" Yes, I'm that immature.

I wouldn't say I have a real adult job, but I do like it. I work part-time as a SAT/SSAT tutor/teacher. I get to teach kids, and watch them get better at stuff. I'm not properly still in school (just finishing up writing my Masters thesis) and only working part-time gives me tons of time to do whatever I want, and still pays the bills!

I'm in Developmental/Cognitive Psych, and rankings are based on US News: 2 top 10 3 in the 10-20 range 1 in the 20-30 range 2 in the 40-50 range and 2 in Canada I'm really not sure where my Canadian schools would fit in compared to the American ones... my guess is that one would be 15-25ish and the other would be somewhat lower.

You're thinking of leaving your PhD program for one of the very few reasons that doesn't have a stigma attached to it. When this same situation happened to me (my supervisor moved to another country - where I don't speak the language - about a year and a half into my PhD), I didn't try to hide it from anyone in my department. It was well-acknowledged to be a totally valid reason to leave; you're supposed to pick a PhD program based on research fit, and I no longer had research fit. I wouldn't worry about what other profs in your department will think. Especially if you explain your reasons, I'm sure they'll understand why you're leaving. Definitely think about getting a letter from the prof who left, and ask your other profs too.

The number varies slightly daily, but somewhere between 8 and 10.

I'd say you have a couple of options. If you think she'll eventually come through and write your letter, even if it's a little late, I'd say just stick with her. Call her even though she might not be in her office - your phone message can't get lost in her inbox, and she's less likely to ignore it than an email. The program you're applying to is definitely used to late LORs (they all are!) and if she gets it in soon, I doubt it'll affect your application at all. Is this prof in the same department that you're applying to? Because if so, or if she knows people on the admissions committee, there's a good chance that they'll just call her or email her to ask for her opinion of you, and she may not even have to write a letter (or they'll ask her for the letter directly, which she won't ignore!). If you're not sure if she'll ever write the letter (which it doesn't sound like), get your other potential letter-writer to write one, and then if the Oxford prof comes through you'll have an extra letter - not so bad, really.

I would not send recommended scores that are below ~70th percentile. The subject tests are often used to prove that you have sufficient background in the subject, but the fact that you're doing a Masters degree in the subject attests to that very well already. I think sending your score will only hurt your application.

My registration number for both tests is different, even though I registered with the same name and info (and my two tests' records were automatically consolidated). So, yours might very well be different too. What I did when I'd lost this information is call ETS - the guy on the other end gave me my test dates & registration number right away, and confirmed my scores, and it didn't cost anything.

I know it's late to be starting this, but I made first contact with three profs today and all three of them wrote back within the day! One of them (who answered exactly 8 minutes after I sent the email) simply answered my questions succinctly, said I would be a good match for her lab, and made a suggestion about applying to her lab from a slightly different program. The other two both gave me enthusiastic responses about my research ideas, said their labs would be great fits, and asked me further questions. I was concerned that profs might not take me as seriously because I wrote to them so late (a couple of these schools have Dec 1 deadlines) but their responses were in fact very encouraging... neat.

When I have conference presentations coming up, I go with "Upcoming" and then the date. You could do that or "expected". In addition, I'd definitely mention that you have this internship lined up in your SOP - it shows your dedication to the field and that you can snag wicked opportunities.

You know, I did consider Christiansen but I thought he was a little too computational for my tastes (which is funny because my bachelor's degree is a B.Computing in Cognitive Science). I just went back to my undergrad school to get some advice from some old profs, and I heard that he's trying to move away from the purely computational stuff. So, I'm definitely going to have to reconsider Cornell!

Thanks, that does sound like something I should consider! I don't think I'd have any trouble getting in (the prof who wanted me to move there is the head of the department so he can admit anyone he wants), but you're right about the funding thing. Especially as an international, funding is really not a guarantee. I'll shoot him an email and ask about the funding situation and any deadlines I'd have to pay attention to on that front. I'm just not entirely sure how to phrase it - I don't want him to think that he's my fallback! Maybe something along the lines of "keeping options open"...

Thanks a bunch for the feedback! I just added USC to my list - not a safety school by any means, but a little lower ranked than most of my others. I think the reason that I'm hesitant to add real "safety" schools is that last year I turned down an offer to transfer from my Masters to a PhD at a good UK school (before I asked/applied!). I'm kind of assuming that if I can't get in anywhere in North America, which I would really prefer, I could always go there.

I'm applying to mostly Developmental (some Cognitive) programs, and my research is generally in the realm of language evolution. Because there aren't a whole lot of profs in my field, my list is looking overly top-heavy: Harvard Yale UPenn UC-Berkeley Columbia WashU Emory NYU University of British Columbia Is this excessively ambitious? If it helps, I'm almost done a Masters, and have a 3.6 undergrad GPA and good GRE scores (660V/800Q/6.0A and 790 Psych). I have a lot of research experience, including a couple months of chimpanzee stuff, but nothing published yet (2 first-authored papers under review, but who knows what'll happen to them). I've presented at a handful of conferences as well. The one shaky part of my application is my LORs - I expect them to be fairly strong, but not spectacular.

It varies a lot, but a few places I've seen have indicated 1-2 pages single-spaced. This seems like a pretty good amount of space in which to address all the things they want us to address. Mine will probably fall on the lower end of this, I imagine.

I have a nitpicky question about graduation dates. I'm planning to have my Masters thesis submitted in its final form in November (meaning that I'd have completed all requirements to graduate). However, my school only does graduation twice a year, so I won't actually get my hands on my degree until June. How do I deal with this on applications/my CV? For "dates attended", do I put "Oct 2007 - Nov 2009"? Obviously "date degree/diploma awarded" would be "June 2010". What about on my CV - can I (after I've handed in said thesis) say that I have my Masters degree, or do I continue to list it as "2007 - present"? How about "2009", with a note saying that my degree is to be awarded in June 2010?

I wouldn't worry about explaining common things like GPAs, double majors, minors, etc., or proving that your degree is equivalent to theirs. I did my Masters in the UK (I'm Canadian) and the admissions office was definitely used to American students and their qualifications. Another thing to note is that many UK schools don't get flooded with applications in the same way as American ones do, and so you can definitely call the graduate secretary of your department (or whoever keeps track of applications) and ask all these questions - they will almost certainly have time for you. I found the whole process to be more personal than American schools.

I wrote the GRE three years ago (before doing a Masters) and scored quite well - 660V/800Q/6.0W. Now that I'm applying to PhD programs, one of my schools (UBC) requires GRE scores that are less than two years old! This rule sucks! UBC isn't my top choice school, but it's definitely my top "safety", and I'd rather not just depend on the Harvards and Penns to accept me. I've sent them an email inquiry about this, but they haven't written back, and my guess is that they won't budge on this requirement. Is it worth it to rewrite the GRE just for one school? Is it at all likely that they'll take my 3-year-old scores (as in, is it even worth calling them)? If I do rewrite, I don't plan on studying very much, because I have a thesis to finish and applications to start (+ finish!). I expect that my new scores will be a little lower than my old ones, but probably not a huge amount (I didn't study much the first time around anyway). I'm thinking that I should probably send my current GRE scores to all my other schools, then rewrite and send the new ones to just UBC, in case the new scores are worse. Does this make sense?

My Masters supervisor has told me that publications really get you noticed when applying to top PhD programs. This is not to say that applicants without publications will not be admitted (especially if they are coming straight out of undergrad), but just that having some publications (particularly first-authored papers in good journals) will ensure that your application is given a thorough look. In his opinion, research experience that is backed up with publications is second only to well-articulated and closely-matched research interests, in terms of importance. He thinks it shows that an applicant can not only do research-type tasks, but can actually get results, which is exactly what you want in your lab.