RunnerGrad

Excuse me, but who do you think you are to tell me that my husband, family, friends, pets... they are "non-necessities?" You may be able to live without those things, and that's totally fine, but you have absolutely no authority to tell anyone else that we "don't need them" and that they are potential hindrances. 
 
I particularly take issue with your insinuation that anyone who doesn't "give up everything" to devote themselves 200% to their studies is somehow less committed than you. 
 
I find your arrogant tone appalling, especially from someone who hasn't even STARTED grad school yet.
 
Good luck. With that attitude, you're going to need lots of it.

I've always thought that your chances of getting into a PhD program are higher if you do a master's thesis.  I don't know how it works at other schools, but at NYU, you only have the option to write a thesis if you have at least a 3.7 gpa in the foundational courses.  To me, the people choosing the thesis option are a bit more distinguished.  At the very least it shows that you can do research.

Er, what?  I fail to see how this makes sense...an MA thesis can prepare you for the work of a dissertation, and can demonstrate to an admissions commitee that you are willing and able to undertake a large, long-term research project.  Besides, a thesis can be turned into a publication, and publications always look good.

With that said, though, you don't need to do a thesis to get into a PhD program.  You can use the paper as a writing sample if you need one, or talk about the process as a research project.

it's better to do a thesis if you DON'T plan to do a PhD, if you want to do a PhD you are going to have to do a dissertation anyway, so it is kind of pointless to do a thesis for a masters (if you have the option of choosing b/w thesis or project).

this is another reason why its never a good idea to get professional references, ask for academic ones instead because they won't be angry you are leaving  them

Its still not a good idea to get professional references though because you are apply to school not a job, that is why schools always say they prefer academic references. Its risky because when you ask them they will know you want to quit your job and you are not satisfied enough in your current position which can lead to relationships being damaged. Unless you are working with someone who has a PhD themselves and are really encouraging you to go its just better to get a academic reference. 

Criminologist: I just finished the first year of my PhD as a bit older student (finished a master's degree immediately prior after working in the nonprofit world for 15 years after my first master's). I can tell you that my marriage, my dogs, and my ongoing nonprofit volunteer work kept me sane during this year, and allowed me to finish the year with a 4.0 GPA, three conference papers presented, a book chapter, and a journal article in print. I was able to focus better because I had great support and because, when I needed to take a break, I had systems in place to do this. Like Eigen said above: marriage, hobbies, and non-romantic relationships all can make you a better scholar. 

What I am arguining is not to study all day long, like do all nighters or something. I have never had to that or intend to. I am just saying that a PhD program will require a lot of motivation and effort, and I just don't feel that serious commitments should get in the way that includes non-necessities such as pets, relationships, hobbies, etc.  These things can end up taking up a lot of time and potentially get you off track. They aren't necessary at all for you to do well.

Yes to sleep. I made it a rule to get a good night's sleep during undergrad and to always get a full night's before an exam. I don't believe in all-nighters, I think they do more harm than good.

^ Even more important is getting approx. 8 hours of sleep a night. It is very difficult to consolidate your memory without proper amounts of sleep.

I am not saying I will be only studying the whole time but I can't have major distractions like some people do, they would take up too much time and to me it is nothing more than an additional burden weighing me down. I just want to approach my studies these four years very seriously, a PhD program is a lot more work and more difficult plus you are being graded, so you cannot expect to have work life balance. Plus it is not like you are not going to have plenty of time to enjoy your pets, hobbies ,relationships,  once you are done so why not them put them aside temporarily so you can be the most productive in your studies and research.

I guess I meant to say professional job with homework, yeah maybe some people would burn out if they don't have certain leisure activities but I just see anything not related to school as a distraction, honestly for me I cannot imagine successfully doing a PhD program and have other major responsibilities that is too many things to do and think about.

I am going to devote all my resources to getting A's in my coureses and doing well in my assistantship duties, sure I'll interact with the other students at times but I think everything else will be less priority. People say grades are not important but you need to have high grades to maintain your funding
 
Also I am glad I have no other responsibilities e.g. Pets, relationship, children, etc. if you have those they will just be a big distraction to your studies. I'm also giving up all the pleasures I used to do like video games during my doctoral studies, I'm just treating it like a professional job now which it is.

I am already learning to give up all things I used to enjoy so I can be prepared for what's ahead I know it will be worth it sorry. I get your point work-life balance is important, but who goes into a PhD program and does not expect that they will have to put many things they want on hold, my question is why bother doing it if you are not willing to give your full 100% effort and dedication. I rather spend some alone time for a few years than have to live with knowing the fact that I could have got more done, got higher grades, wrote more papers, etc. when I had the opportunity. 

Sure. I'll put my marriage on hold (so long husband, go find a gf for the next 7 years while I finish my PhD), give my pets away, etc., just so I can focus on research. That doesn't seem like a recipe for disaster. 
 
I am a pretty successful student, I think, and I work maybe 6-8 hours a day (I'm in the humanities, so no lab work, but I do have to work on independent research and I also have teaching duties). That leaves 8 hours of sleep, and the rest of the time to the other so-called distractions. You see, I found that after working more than 6 hours, I was no longer productive. I'd sit in front of the computer staring into space, or rereading paragraphs from a book over and over unable to concentrate.
 
If I didn't have a partner* at home willing to look at my drafts or bounce ideas with (not to mention the emotional support, the cooking when I'm not in the mood to, etc.), a cat to snuggle up to me when I'm having writer's block, or a dog to force me to go outside a couple of times a day so I can go and process ideas during a walk, I would not be successful. Productivity isn't about spending every waking hour "at work," but about making your working hours count.
 
* this could also be a friend/roommate. It just so happens to be my partner.
 
Going out to beer with friends isn't just a "social" activity. We talk about our research... we bounce ideas back and forth. It releases tension but it also allows us to "work" by developing our thoughts. I find inspiration in those moments.
 
The people I know who struggle the most are those who don't have any of those things and who focus exclusively on "work." They live by themselves because roommates are too distracting. They don't have pets. They don't go to anything "social." There's no balance. Their work suffers... they don't really exchange ideas with anyone else, and what they produce reflects that.

This has been my experience as well. My department has an almost weekly happy hour frequented by grad students and faculty. Some people talk about random things (sports, news, etc.), others talk about teaching, others about research. I've found that in some of these small conversations I've gotten great ideas or insights into my research that I hadn't gotten otherwise. Sometimes just being asked to give the 30 second version of your research can force you into thinking about it in a different way or allow someone else to say something you hadn't thought of. Without those conversations, my work would definitely suffer.
 
And yea, I'm one of those people who can't work all the time. Back when I did my comprehensive exams (which were multiple questions over like 10 days), I remember people in my department (mostly those not yet at the exams stage) being surprised that I was still attending the class I was TAing (I was mostly grading but went to every single lecture), working out, and even watching an episode or two of a TV show online. But you know what? You can't work for 16 hours a day for the 10 days without a break. And really, since I was limited to like 25 pages double-spaced per answer, I would've ended up writing way more than I needed if I'd worked that long. Instead, I rode my bike to the gym, worked out with friends (including some who had PhDs and thus totally understood what comps were and why you might need a break), cooked myself real food, etc. It's about knowing what you need to work efficiently and be productive and taking the time to do whatever that is.
 
Back to the original question though:
- Be open and willing to learn.
- If you're in the humanities or social sciences, take the time to just browse the library shelves in your general field and in your intended research area to get an idea of what's been published and what research resources are available to you. (Even better, meet with a librarian early on to make sure you know what your school has and the support s/he can give you.)
- Skim through recent journal issues in your field to get a sense of what topics are current and which are becoming dated. Pay attention to book reviews if there are any and use those to help you find relevant books for your discipline and research area.
- Learn to use reference management software (EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, etc.) and start keeping track of your references that way.
- Figure out an easy to use system for staying abreast of current/new research in both books and journals that may be of interest.
- Read your graduate handbook (and TA handbook if needed) so you know what is expected of you. Ask questions if expectations are unclear.
- Start figuring out what, if any, courses outside the department you might want to take, how often they're offered, how difficult they are, etc.
- If you're going to need research methods training, figure out how to get that ASAP. In the social sciences, this often means taking courses in qualitative methods, statistics, and/or GIS and seats in those classes can fill because they're attracting students from an array of disciplines. Getting your methods coursework done means you can start collecting data sooner.
- Get to know whomever helps oversee grant apps (NIH, NSF, SSRC, Fulbright, IAF, etc.) at your institution and ask them what you can do beginning now to prepare to apply in the future, when you should be applying, what you'll need to be competitive, etc. And, while you're there, get them to help you set up some alerts for grant announcements.
 
There's probably more you could do, especially related to conferences and networking, but I don't want to overload anyone with suggestions.

Good luck getting into a good school with a B-. It is going to get worse from here.

Are you serious or just trying to be cute? And why do you up-vote all your own posts? Seems pretty loser-ish. But didn't you call me the resident loser for giving someone advice that everyone else agreed with? Now you're saying this person is doomed with a B-. You're a pretty weird pup, chap. At least I'm consistent.

I just don't agree that the only stuff worthy of talking about, the only stuff considered "intellectual" is shit about politics, world affairs, and research. I was friends with a few professors too. We would go out for drinks on a bi-weekly basis. I really enjoyed listening to them too. But one thing I noticed was, there was only so much they were willing to talk about. That's why I liked talking to my non-academic friends. Now, don't get me wrong, I consider my non-academics friends to be some of the biggest intellectuals I know, the curiousest of minds, but they definitely were not what you would call educated. 
 
Anyway, we could talk about anything, and I mean anything. Sometimes, just to get the conversation going, I would throw out a topic (like "Why don't people fuck babies?") and they would run with it. That's one thing I love about stand-up comedy. Comics are people who are just curious about the world. Sure, the curiosity stems from trying to gather up material for their act, but their minds do naturally tend to wander. Think about philosophy, the branch that shaped every known academic branch today. Philosophy was just a bunch of guys sitting around wondering about shit. ("Why do they call it Ovaltine?")
 
So, when I would hang out with my professor friends, I would notice something. It was almost like an extra class session, which is great, but come the fuck on, I'm trying to have drinks to forget about class. What is a life if you have a PhD in X and all you can ever think about or talk about is X? There are so many places your mind can go to if you're willing to talk about or think about something else. When I would hang out with my professor friends, I noticed that I was just absorbing information (they were just telling me shit about linguistics and/or computer science that wasn't mentioned in the class textbook), but my mind didn't really expand. When I talked to my non-academic friends about God knows what, my mind went to places it's never been before. 
 
So I call bullshit when somebody whines that all the inferior, uneducated lay folk don't stimulate their ginormous minds. Fuck that shit. Your ginormous mind is stuck on one fucking track. And, to be honest, you're probably not as smart as you think you are. I'm more impressed with someone who can come up with something on the spot than someone who can recite something they read in some fucking appendix somewhere. 
 
Now, get me, it is difficult to find a group of friends literally willing to talk about anything. But when you find them, you'll be happy you did. When you're able to just think, you'll feel your mind expanding. That's how creativity comes about and how new ideas are formed. Not by going to PhD classes in X, talking to professors with degrees in X, making nerdy little jokes about X, and walking back home listening to your faggy little wind chime hippy music on your iPod thinking about X. 

Canada SUCKS

You're not understanding the overarching purpose of my argument. You are an exception to the rule, not the norm. This thread is about general advice, not exceptions. Applying to a number of programs for academic programs is sound advice, this isn't about you. 
 
Cherry picked? I didn't realize that quoting the objective of the program and career opportunities is cherry-picking. Seem like pretty crucial aspects of the program, no?
 
Just because you can parlay a professional masters program into an acceptance to a doctoral program doesn't mean that your program isn't a professional program. I could get acceptance to a doctoral program in political science with a MPP, doesn't mean that a MPP isn't a professional program.
 
Academic programs DO NOT have internships as a crucial component of the program. Academic programs DO NOT have no research based courses, and DO NOT lack a option for a thesis. 
 
My definition for graduate academic programs is pretty simple: they are geared towards research. Professional programs are geared towards practical skills for the workplace. Guess which category your program falls into? I mean, christ, two of your four semesters are practicum semesters.
 
You even said yourself that you could theoretically apply to 9 programs. So even in your exception case, it is still possible to apply to a large number of programs. 

The part I called arrogant was the part where you say you are better than someone else without really knowing these other people. I think this is arrogant because:
 
1) You are not the graduate admissions committee. How do you know whether or not you are actually better than another applicant. That is, you are not qualified to make statements on who should / should not get admitted to any particular program (not saying I am qualified either--most of us here are also graduate students, not faculty members!). So I think it is arrogant that you imply you know more about what is a "good fit" for graduate school than the committees that decide this.
 
2) You have limited information on these people. For your friends, you probably do know more about their entire profiles since you know them personally, but for the "other people", if you are just comparing their online profiles, you are basically just making a judgement on a few numbers! So, I think it is arrogant to assume that you are better than these other people because your numbers are better. You don't know all the information!
 
I agree that it's natural and normal and healthy to be disappointed when things don't work out. But the mature path forward is to figure out how to improve for the future (as you said here). The immature reaction would be to try to find fault with the system and shifting the blame to someone/something else. For example, your statements about how other people with "worse" profiles than you got in. If they got in and you did not, wouldn't it be true, by definition, that these people had better profiles than you? 
 
Perhaps you don't intend to say arrogant/immature things about the other applicants. I should clarify--I meant that your actions here are arrogant and immature, but I don't really know anything about you as a person. You might be a great person! I am sorry if I insinuated otherwise. But even good people make mistakes sometimes and sometimes it's hard to see the impact of your statements because you know your own intention. The impact of what you say resonate with people much more than the intent, though. This was why many people reacted to your statements in this way and which is why I thought I would bring it up to let you know!

A lot of those messenger bags look nice, but I can't imagine carrying them around all day, or commuting with them. My neck and back would be killing me! But kudos to those of you who can manage them. Considering I see women in suits and dresses carrying nice backpacks (and I carried one myself when working full time and wearing a suit to work), I'll stick with my backpack! As long as it is clean, neat, and professional looking, I don't see the problem with carrying a backpack. Like I said, I see lots of professional women commuting with them, and I did so myself. Maybe it's because I'm a non-traditional student, and so I'm older than the typical grad student, but my back and neck would not be able to deal with a messenger-type bag, especially when having to stand on a train, bus, or subway, for significant periods of time during my commute.

I think this is the comment that sticks out to me the most. I am not from India but I also come from a culture that values academic achievement in a way similar to India (I think). So, from the point of view of an outsider, my honest opinion is that comments like this really show a student to be immature. 
 
In my opinion, success in North America (maybe most of the world too, but my experience is only in North America) is not defined by things like test scores, grades and CV experience. Your comment here sounds very arrogant and entitled to me. It sounds like you expected to get into more/better places than your friends because your profile is slightly better than theirs. Graduate school admission is not a game where you get "points" for high scores etc and then the one with the most points get in. I think there are a lot of factors that cannot be quantified when it comes to admissions, for example--how would you "fit" in with what the department is currently looking for.
 
The other part that I thought was entitled sounding was that it sounds like you felt the schools owed you an explanation because they rejected you. This is not how it works--you might be able to ask for tips on how to improve next time, but it's rare to get an actual reason for rejection. Part of the reason is that they don't remember or note the exact reason for every single rejection they give and the other part is probably to avoid people trying to defend themselves or trying to change the school's mind. Unless you have good reason to suspect wrongdoing, the professional thing is to accept that the school does not want you and move on. 
 
Anyways I wish you the best and I hope you consider what others have said to you in this thread and consider more deeply how your comments might impact other people in the future!

I dont know why you got offended so easily. The thing about North America you mentioned (success in North America is not defined by things like test scores, grades and CV experience) is the exact reason why hordes of students from India  are moving to US for their higher education. Because here in India all that matters is test scores, grades and CV. And its a simple thing if you think youre better than someone else its natural to expect better. Should I expect worse? I didnt even say they shouldnt give admits to such students and should admit me. I just said looking at those profiles I expected an admit. Nothing wrong in that. And the profiles I'm talking abt are not of my friends. They are of diff people who applied. My friends' and my profile are similar. Thats why I was disappointed when they rejected me. And its natural to be disappointed. And please dont judge people. Because youve judged me wrong. By asking why they rejected me I was hoping to get tips on how to improve next time and not asking for a whole explanation as to why they rejected me. Anyways thanks for the reply but don't judge people.