Taeyers

The ETS practice tests are important for this, because those are the very types of questions you'll see on the actual test. I scored 166 on the math section and I think what helped me the most is taking those practice tests while being mindful of the time limit but still taking my sweet time. Keep cool and work at a slow but steady pace, and those questions will become more manageable. There were a couple where I had to actively remind myself to not become flustered and get sloppy, but I think it paid off.

On Friday afternoon, I brought my dog to the vet thinking she wasn't well and might have early Cushing's or early symptoms of heart failure (both cases would still give us multiple years with her). Instead, found out that her chest and abdomen are so full of fluid that she's considered to be in critical condition. After spending 4 hours and nearly $1k at our vet clinic and then the emergency after-hours clinic, we went home while she waited at the emergency vet for treatment. We were told that she needs thoracocentesis, but may decompensate and die from the procedure. After two hours of crying non-stop at home, I called them to find out that they had already done it, she made it through fine, and they forgot to call and tell me. RAWR! Nothing in the world could have prepared me to have to sign forms with directives as to whether or not my dog should be resuscitated if her emergency procedure causes her heart to stop that day. She seemed mostly fine all day, and 3 months ago (when she had her last bloodwork and x-rays) she was perfectly healthy. Because my energetic little dog was such a good sport and hid her symptoms, we had no idea she was in a health crisis. She seems to be better now (after I pried diuretics from our usual vet on Saturday), wagging her tail as happily as ever and breathing almost normally, but I'm constantly terrified for her and for us. I'm not even remotely ready to see her die or to make that decision. My heart hurts...

That's what I did, for about the same reason. Programs in my field are not that rare, but my program (and city) is hands-down the best for my particular interests. At least a few other graduate students in my program also have their undergrad degrees from the same institution. No one is too particularly worried about it. In fact, one such student just graduated and landed himself a very prestigious post-doc elsewhere. I guess I'm optimistic that the pro of being trained in a great department for my subfield will balance out the "con" of staying at my undergrad institution for grad school.

When my PI submitted a paper that we co-wrote, I was emailed a form to sign electronically that included a statement that the paper has not been submitted to any other journals. So in my case it was very unambiguous, but norms tend to vary widely across fields. I'd do a cursory online search and ask around a bit, in a curious rather than dismayed way. Do you know another faculty member who would give you a frank response to this professor's suggestion in lieu of the most diplomatic response? I mean, his plan might not be outright wrong and unethical in your field, but it could still be perceived negatively. [i've been pleasantly surprised by how much some faculty in my department are willing to level with me and treat me more as a junior colleague under their advisement rather than a naive student, so I figure it's always worth it to ask when I'm curious about norms and such.]

I completely agree that it's a stressful process, I was there myself only last year, and I was definitely a wreck about it. One of my recommenders was a week late with her letter, and another (the PI I had been working with for nearly 2 years) was almost a month late. I was still the department's first choice for admission (according to the DGS), and they gave me a 3 year fellowship I didn't even apply for. The point is that most things don't matter nearly as much as we worry they do, I guarantee something as small as the presence or absence of letterhead will not make the difference between admission or rejection. Academics tend to be busy people who have much more important things to learn about you - things that will actually shed light on your qualifications and future success. Do try your best to brush this off and roll with the punches. You'll save yourself a lot of stress by choosing your battles.

When I was a full-time "teaching specialist", I wrote several letters of recommendation for students for both internal scholarships and external internships and programs. I never used letterhead because I was just a glorified TA and it never crossed my mind to try and figure out how to do that. No one ever contacted me to try to confirm the authenticity of my letter, and some of those students were granted the scholarship or internship they applied for. Take a deep breath, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Also, I bet that taking this so personally and trying to "correct" your recommenders will probably result in far more negative outcomes than just accepting this.

You have good points, fuzzy. While the side project may add stress when I already have my hands full with moving forward on my main topic, it can probably help dilute frustration if my main research is stalling. And it is true that in lab research, while we may say we're working on one project, that may actually mean a handful of different studies and lines of inquiry. I guess the reason I haven't mentioned what I actually want is because I don't know. I have an obvious attachment to this project and would love to publish a complete picture of it, but it has also been very frustrating managing that PI's more aggravating traits (one of which is making baffling and very stubborn arguments to try and avoid dealing with problems that he would rather ignore). I wouldn't mind never having to butt heads with him again, or having to deal with knowing that animals were sacrificed pointlessly because I yielded on some stupid argument earlier on. Not to mention that his tendency to want to argue for sport may mean that I commit to doing the project but end up having to do it his way and not mine. I have to consider the possibility that the only reason he ever allowed me to get my way is because he hoped to persuade me to join his lab.

I kind of had the same impression as fuzzy, at least in part because I can think of similar situations with my past students. I say "almost" because I'm sure I've never been particularly stern with or made a "face" at them, but there were a handful that I connected with more, and as a result I would chat and joke with them during the long lab periods. Meanwhile I liked my other students just fine, but if there was no interpersonal connection, I wouldn't end up behaving the same way toward them. I really hope I didn't make any of them feel badly about that, and from evaluations I know 100% of them found me "approachable and friendly", but I think it's just a fact of life as a human that some people will like you more than others. Your advisor's feelings could be a more extreme version of that. It's entirely possible that there's no interpersonal connection, hence the unpleasant attitude, but you're a perfectly capable student and have nothing to worry about as far as your degree progress. If that's the case try to look on the bright side: you will never be in a position where you're taken advantage of because of your chummy relationship. There are some very positive aspects to keeping things strictly professional, even if it's not all that fun sometimes. I've had my arm twisted by friendship with a boss, and it's not cool. Personally, I'm pretty sure the head of my department really finds me to be not his cup of tea. He cut my grad program interview significantly short, and I've gotten a great deal of "I wish you would die" facial expressions from him. Two things I've come to learn: 1) I was still the committee's top choice for admission out of all the applicants 2) He makes that face at many people outside his lab and a couple in his lab. It's just his version of the "resting bitch face". And now, after knowing the man for two years, he actually forces his version of a smile and greets me by name when he sees me. Give it time

I would take the offer at the great school and roll with the punches moving forward. As a married person, I can't even describe how much things continue to change and you continue to learn about each other past 6 months, and even past a couple years after you first start dating. You made a really smart decision in telling him you're not ready yet. I personally feel like declining a dream PhD offer would be about as drastic as a quick engagement, and at 6 months that seems like a really bad idea... If this really is the relationship that will survive the ups and downs of everything that comes with marriage, it will also survive long-distance while you finish your degree. A man that would be a great future husband would encourage you to do what's best for your future, which sounds like accepting this great offer. Ultimately you should trust your gut, but be wary of the honeymoon period and allowing yourself to feel like you really know him to be "the one" (worth abandoning your goals that you worked towards for years) at this relative early point in your relationship.

Hi all, I'm looking for some straight-forward advice on something that I've gotten conflicting feedback about. In a nutshell, I'm considering pursuing an arrangement where I work on a side project with one PI during the course of my thesis research in another PI's lab. Specifics: I had a couple years of research experience before grad school, and much of that time was spent pursuing one project that I've been lucky enough to handle almost entirely myself. I did everything for all the experiments, collected and analyzed all the data myself, and got to have the final say on next steps. Basically, I really trust everything that has come out of it so far and this project is my baby. It's not a high-impact project by any means, but we did find a dramatic phenomenon that catches people's eye. However, the reality of my situation now is that a different PI is probably best for me as a PhD student. This new PI's project idea for me is something I'm pretty excited about, and in talking to him and his other PhD student I've found that I really like his lab management philosophy. He also has connections in a variety of future opportunities I'm interested in pursuing. My DGS says it's reasonable to have a side project, and in fact he is planning on publishing a paper with someone else's current student that he worked with in the past. On the other hand, it feels a bit brazen to ask the new PI that I be allowed to spend something like 20% of my time working in someone else's lab. I also wonder if I would simply be happier and more productive without having to split my time like that, and losing control of this project (by handing it off entirely to someone else) would be worth the trade-off. Of course an ugly possibility is that it gets back-burnered indefinitely and I never get a publication from it, but hopefully that wouldn't happen... For what it's worth, I'm currently funded by a 3-year fellowship, so the new PI wouldn't actually be paying for me to work for someone else. Thoughts? Similar experiences? Thanks!

That's right, the PI is the corresponding author. That does remove a good chunk of the responsibility from my lap. Thanks!

Thanks everyone, that's all very helpful. I will clarify just a bit further that in my specific subfield, I have always understood the claims to be an equal responsibility of both the first author and the last (the PI), but a paper is typically assumed to be primarily written by the first author and then scrutinized and edited by the PI. This assumption is easy enough to correct, and I don't think anyone would be surprised to find out that a first author didn't do much writing but the majority of the lab work, but the default assumption is that the first author is heavily responsible for the writing. Anecdotally, this PI's postdoc tells me that she writes most of the paper, but then he rewrites basically everything she wrote. She also writes the drafts of the revisions and rebuttal letters. The PI whose lab I will probably join after rotations says that you have to have written at least the first solid draft to be a first author on a paper in his lab. This is especially helpful, and "over-interpreting a graph" is the wording I was looking for. This graph is not a central point in the paper, and is more along the lines of supporting observations. I think I would have freaked out a little if he "over-interpreted" something critically important... Everyone's advice basically reinforced what I already suspected: that it's not good, but not abhorrently bad either, and I should get a grip and accept that as his (somewhat questionable) choice. I will still cross my fingers that reviewers will catch it, and I will probably bring it up to him at some point, but I'm not going to burn bridges over it. Thanks guys.

If it's relevant, this is already the revised version, but this statement appears in a newly added paragraph in the revision, and the figure was also changed per reviewer request. This makes me worry that since we're already making changes that reviewers asked for previously, they won't be as thorough in looking for additional revisions. And truth be told, I'm not naive or uninformed about his work in the paper at all, so I don't think I could convincingly pass off my inquiry as asking him to educate me on something I don't know much about. He and I have butted heads before because I stand up to him on things that he wants to gloss over but really shouldn't, so that's why I expect him to be readily defensive and argumentative if I bring it up. Not to mention that there were a couple other things in the paper that he tried to misrepresent, but changed when I pointed them out, so he knows that I'm not just a confused baby scientist, and I know that gently bending the truth when describing data is something he does try to do. I'm glad you agree that going behind his back is extreme. That was my gut reaction too, but since I've never been in a remotely similar position before, I don't have any reference point for an appropriate course of action.

Right, that's what I always learned too! The statement doesn't specifically include "statistically", but the statement is unambiguous in indicating a "significant" difference between the two conditions. I hoped that my comment would have inspired him to say something more appropriate about a trend or potential difference instead, but that's just not what happened...

I need some straight-forward informed advice on a moral dilemma, because I want to avoid a situation where I show up with a flamethrower to a knife fight, but I also want to address this ASAP if it's a serious problem. Background: I worked with a PI for a couple years before starting grad school, and he did a handful of studies for a paper. He asked me to do some work and generate data for a minor contribution, which now makes up 2 of several figures in the paper overall. However, in my biomedical science field, the norm is to list the PI as last author, and no one else worked on the paper, so by default I'm listed as first author. He's not my thesis advisor and probably won't be (still rotating at this time, but I plan to choose another lab). Dilemma: right now, the manuscript includes a graph that shows 2 conditions across 3 doses of a drug. X0, X1, and X2 are one condition in 3 dose groups, and Y0, Y1, and Y2 are another condition in the same doses. Symbol * is on the graph, showing that X1 and X2 are statistically different from X0, and symbol # shows that Y1 and Y2 are significantly different from Y0. The legend says that symbol $ would indicate if there was a statistical difference between X and Y in any dose group, but this symbol doesn't appear on the graph. There does seem to be a difference between X2 and Y2, but it must be just short of statistically significant. However, in the written results section, he wrote that X and Y are different with reference to that graph. I pointed this out and told him that I don't see that in the graph, and asked if maybe the symbols got mixed up (like maybe instead of * or #, he meant to use $ to show the difference). He didn't respond to my email (which is normal, he usually doesn't directly respond to comments on written things he sends to me), and I got an email a few hours later from the journal thanking us for submitting the manuscript. I downloaded the file that was submitted, and while he did change most of the things I commented on, he left that statement and the graph exactly as they were, claiming that it shows something it doesn't actually show. So what do I do about this? While it's mostly not my work and not my writing, it still looks like it is because my name happens to be in the first author position. I don't feel comfortable asking the PI why he submitted it like that because he likes to be argumentative and defensive by default, but I do want it to be corrected. I'm hoping at least one of the reviewers will catch it and he will have to fix it, but what if they don't? I asked a fellow grad student what she would do, and she says go around him and contact the editor to say it was an accident and needs to be corrected, but I'm worried that's a bit more aggressive than necessary. Help please! Thanks y'all.

Are you sure he's actually taking your work and putting his name on it? It seems likely that he might just be giving you the papers for practice, just to give you the experience in a low-pressure learning environment. I know in my field it's considered fairly normal for PIs to share papers they're peer-reviewing with their students to give the students the opportunity to practice, but the student's review is not the one submitted.

I don't actually have any tips of converting GPAs, but I have to point out a couple mistakes in your "facts": 1) the minimum GPA to graduate is 2.0. If a 2.75 GPA were required to graduate, anything below a B would be considered a failing grade, and that's just bananas. 2) 3-3.5 is most certainly not below average for undergrad. GPAs in that range might be considered at or below average for student admitted to some graduate programs, but that's a whole different story. An undergrad student producing average work would be very lucky to have GPA close to 3.5, and even that is largely dependent on the program/field. I can tell you that my undergrad institution awards distinctions to graduates with GPAs starting at 3.5-3.6.

Don't work for free "until you can get a grant". That could take far longer than you hope. First try to find an advisor that you are allowed to be funded by, and if you can't or have no interest in the projects that faculty with funding are undertaking, then tell you DGS or department head that you'll have to leave the program due to the fact that your options are so limited. Make sure you know the full list of faculty whom you could consider, and work with the DGS on sorting out all your options. My department (also in the biomedical sciences at UMN, not that it's very relevant) has a list of core faculty, a just-as-long list of adjunct faculty whose primary appointments are in other departments, and strangely enough, a few professors that take our department's students that are not on either list. I've personally seen much more flexibility than I ever expected in accommodating students and handling problems, so don't be afraid to ask. For what it's worth, I doubt your current advisor would be offended about you not wanting to work for free for an undetermined amount of time. That would be a big overreaction to a perfectly practical choice on your part. As far as I've seen, if a student really wants to work with someone who can't offer funding, they either bite the bullet and move on or work out a co-advisorship with another lab that can fill in the funding gap.

I would specifically ask ETS if it would be fine for you to use your old passport after you have already changed your name with the social security office. It might not be a big deal, but I'd hate to find out after the fact if it actually is. Legally speaking, I think your name is officially changed once the SS office processes it, even if you don't have new forms of ID yet, so I can see how that might put you into a gray area if you try to use a passport as valid ID when it doesn't have your current legal name on it. My personal anecdote is that I was a permanent resident rather than a citizen at the time of my test, and they wouldn't let me in with just my driver's license. I literally had to leave and drive back home to find my green card, and they would only let me into the exam room when I showed them both my driver's license and my green card. Point of the story being that you certainly shouldn't expect them to be accommodating.

One possibility that comes to mind is that he's already in a relationship, and thought that he had built a casual flirty rapport with you that wasn't going to go further. It's not really something that would be widely considered appropriate, but it also seems that casual meaningless flirting can be pretty common for people in relationships, and most people wouldn't come straight out and call it cheating. He might have been enjoying the flattering interactions until you tried to make it less casual, and then he realized that he better reel it in or he might be looking at real trouble. Anyway, it's nothing you should seriously worry about. A part of growing up is realizing how little things like this should affect your self image. For the record, as a 19-21 year old I had two relationships with men who had 9-10 years on me. I was mature for my age, and they were immature for theirs, so we met in the middle. Of all the things in this world that people do that are outright wrong and malicious, it's a sad comment on someone's character if this is what they're going to clutch their pearls about.

Don't even worry about it, I doubt anyone will raise an eyebrow at it. My transcript shows that I withdrew from 2 classes (analytical chemistry lecture and lab) during my junior year of undergrad, and no one had given me any indication of having even noticed it. During my interview with the head of the department, he was skimming my transcript and simply said a couple of times what an excellent student I am. Seems to me like they are fully aware that everyone hits speed bumps along the way, and pay much more attention to the general trend in your performance rather than outliers.

In my program, you'd fit in pretty well dressing like you live on someone else's couch. Might be a research-based science thing, but I generally wouldn't worry about it unless you know your program has expectations.

Fair enough, I'm aware that it's very common in most programs, but less so for us, I think. A cohort of 4 is the largest the program has ever had, so they have typically sent out as many offers as the number of students they can take (2-3). Anyway, I was just sharing how I was directly told this information was used. It might have been especially important during my application cycle because half of the applicants they brought in to interview had only applied to this program and nowhere else.

I think it just helps them know what to expect if they extend an admission offer or waitlist you. If you only applied to this one school, then you would almost certainly accept an offer of admission either way, but if you're applying to other schools (some of which might be "better" in some sense or another) and you're a very competitive applicant, they might expect you to decline an offer and plan accordingly. Anecdote: Since my PI is on the adcomm of my grad program and likes to chat, I happen to know that the program could comfortably fund 4 students for the newest cohort, but they offered admission to 5 people because one of the the students they wanted was more likely to accept admission to another program. They were right, this student did decline, and 4 of us will attend.