timetobegin

I am neither masculine or white. "Approachable, casual, and conversational" are incredibly broad terms you can incorporate into your own teaching style, in any interpretation you choose. 

I've TA'd four courses throughout my Master's program, ranging from two tutorials of 20 students each, to five tutorials of 30 students each. I've received stellar feedback response from all my students, and never had a single bad review. I was hired into a TA job not knowing if I'd even enjoy teaching, but it turns out... I'm actually pretty good at this job. It just takes time.
Number #1 advice: Think of your favourite TAs when you were in undergrad. Why did you like them? Emulate them. For me, my favourite TAs were always relatable. They were students, too. They were conversational (but not overly buddy-buddy), casual in their demeanour (but still professional), did their marking on time, and were approachable. The ones who pretended they were already Professors, swept in and out of the class without ever engaging with us... they didn't make for a positive learning environment. Learn from their mistakes, before you ever enter this job.
Presentations and Material:
Make tutorial presentation slides that are clear and concise. Do not read from the PPT comments section, or from notes.  Don't lecture at them - they already go to a lecture and learn passively. Engage with them. Talk to them conversationally. Ask questions, and put them into a discussion group at least once a tutorial. Silences are fine -- try to rephrase the question, or just let them ponder.  Don't sit behind the desk. Walk around, gesture, sit on top of a table. Get them to WATCH you instead of their phones. ALWAYS make your examples relatable. Relate to TV, to movies, to running jokes in the university -- whatever will help them remember the point. Help them out. A little formula sheet they can keep beside them while going over questions goes a long way. How To sheets can help, too (and are easily found online). You exist to help solidify the material in their mind, and to make their learning experience just a little bit easier. So do that. Team effort. The prof is there to teach the students, but you're in this WITH them. I always try to use a collective 'WE'RE going to attempt this question!'. It's just small phrasing, but solidarity matters. I always ask "Does that make sense?", "Are you guys following me on this?". Their feedback is constant, and wanted, and I make sure 80% of us are on the same page before moving forward. Personality:
Be passionate about what you teach! Always. Go on a rant about something you KNOW they think is boring, rave about something you want them to remember, exclaim how cool a topic is. Even if the students don't agree you with, they will appreciate genuine enthusiasm (or agreement of dislike) for a topic.  Say hi to your students as they enter your class. Recognize their faces, aim to know at least 50% of their names by midway through the course. The best way to do this, IMO, is to hand back their assignments personally (rather than dumping them on a table and letting them find their own). You can also ask them to say their names before they respond to any question (this works better with upper level students). Put them in groups almost immediately, especially if this is a first year class. Make them be friends with each other. The worst thing that can happen is a tutorial where everyone sits once seat apart from each other and never speaks until they're told to do group work. I don't call my students out, but I always try to respond with their name when they talk. "Yes, John", or "Great point, Sahil!" shows that you care. I don't mind talking to students for 5-10 minutes after class, so long as they're not asking me to re-grade something, or teach them something new. Small questions, clarifications, or just general chat about the course fosters a strong learning environment. You shouldn't just Shut Down as soon as your hour is done. For first years, I try to alternate my office hours, so that one week I'm in the TA office space, and another week I'm in a more open environment like a coffee shop. Different students will come to different styles of office hours. Sometimes an office intimidates them. Don't be that TA that wears a suit and tie, or work clothes, to class. Jeans are more than ok for 99% of academia, so long as they're not ripped. Marking, Emails, and Other:
Be real with students. Keep them up-to-date on what's happening with the marking. Go over any common errors or problems after each assignment or midterm.  Keep them informed about any new developments. I always make sure to explain WHY we did things a certain way throughout the course, or why we marked something in that way. Students like to be kept in the loop. I try to keep my emails professional, but just slightly more casual than a Professor would be. I've never had a problem with students being inappropriate, or being out of line. Give respect, receive respect. I also always try to respond within 24 hours, even if it's just a quick 'I'll get back to you!'. Be reasonable, be flexible, but let students know what you expect from them, and what they can expect from you.  At the same time, I ask students NOT to take pictures of my slides. I don't call out individuals, but a simple 'hey y'all, that's weird for me. If you come up to me after class I'll let you copy the slide" works fine. Never bad mouth a professor, even if the students hate him or her. Listen and sympathize, but never agree. In discussion tutorials, I try not to shut down opinions unless they're TOTALLY off base. A "That's interesting, what do you all think?" can help foster discussion and re-direct, or a "Hmm, you're not the right track, but not quite there...".  Accept that you will mess up. More than once.
In the first course I ever TA'd, I was doing a (very simple) calculation on the board... and got it wrong. Erased it, went through it again.... and the answer was still wrong.  I admitted that it had been a long day, laughed it off, and we carried on... even though I was dying inside. Those students still gave me great reviews. It's okay not to know everything, it's okay to mess up, and it's especially okay (in broad 1st year courses) to admit that a particular area isn't your strongest point.  I've had my heel break in the middle of lecturing. I've dropped stuff all over the floor. Again, be relatable, be approachable, and admit you're just a student, too.  I once made a huge mistake with a professor, to the point where we had to scrap an entire question on the midterm due to my misinterpretation. I went to her as soon as I realized the mistake and admitted fault. Yes, it's horrible, and yes, you might have to apologize openly to both the professor and the students, but you're learning. It's OKAY. You're not expected to be psychically connected to the professor's thoughts. If you have a very hands-off professor who expects you to Just Know Things, schedule a meeting with them 2-3 days before every weekly tutorial session. Tell them what you're doing, ask them for any information related to midterms or assignments, and clarify concepts.  

I've TA'd four courses throughout my Master's program, ranging from two tutorials of 20 students each, to five tutorials of 30 students each. I've received stellar feedback response from all my students, and never had a single bad review. I was hired into a TA job not knowing if I'd even enjoy teaching, but it turns out... I'm actually pretty good at this job. It just takes time.
Number #1 advice: Think of your favourite TAs when you were in undergrad. Why did you like them? Emulate them. For me, my favourite TAs were always relatable. They were students, too. They were conversational (but not overly buddy-buddy), casual in their demeanour (but still professional), did their marking on time, and were approachable. The ones who pretended they were already Professors, swept in and out of the class without ever engaging with us... they didn't make for a positive learning environment. Learn from their mistakes, before you ever enter this job.
Presentations and Material:
Make tutorial presentation slides that are clear and concise. Do not read from the PPT comments section, or from notes.  Don't lecture at them - they already go to a lecture and learn passively. Engage with them. Talk to them conversationally. Ask questions, and put them into a discussion group at least once a tutorial. Silences are fine -- try to rephrase the question, or just let them ponder.  Don't sit behind the desk. Walk around, gesture, sit on top of a table. Get them to WATCH you instead of their phones. ALWAYS make your examples relatable. Relate to TV, to movies, to running jokes in the university -- whatever will help them remember the point. Help them out. A little formula sheet they can keep beside them while going over questions goes a long way. How To sheets can help, too (and are easily found online). You exist to help solidify the material in their mind, and to make their learning experience just a little bit easier. So do that. Team effort. The prof is there to teach the students, but you're in this WITH them. I always try to use a collective 'WE'RE going to attempt this question!'. It's just small phrasing, but solidarity matters. I always ask "Does that make sense?", "Are you guys following me on this?". Their feedback is constant, and wanted, and I make sure 80% of us are on the same page before moving forward. Personality:
Be passionate about what you teach! Always. Go on a rant about something you KNOW they think is boring, rave about something you want them to remember, exclaim how cool a topic is. Even if the students don't agree you with, they will appreciate genuine enthusiasm (or agreement of dislike) for a topic.  Say hi to your students as they enter your class. Recognize their faces, aim to know at least 50% of their names by midway through the course. The best way to do this, IMO, is to hand back their assignments personally (rather than dumping them on a table and letting them find their own). You can also ask them to say their names before they respond to any question (this works better with upper level students). Put them in groups almost immediately, especially if this is a first year class. Make them be friends with each other. The worst thing that can happen is a tutorial where everyone sits once seat apart from each other and never speaks until they're told to do group work. I don't call my students out, but I always try to respond with their name when they talk. "Yes, John", or "Great point, Sahil!" shows that you care. I don't mind talking to students for 5-10 minutes after class, so long as they're not asking me to re-grade something, or teach them something new. Small questions, clarifications, or just general chat about the course fosters a strong learning environment. You shouldn't just Shut Down as soon as your hour is done. For first years, I try to alternate my office hours, so that one week I'm in the TA office space, and another week I'm in a more open environment like a coffee shop. Different students will come to different styles of office hours. Sometimes an office intimidates them. Don't be that TA that wears a suit and tie, or work clothes, to class. Jeans are more than ok for 99% of academia, so long as they're not ripped. Marking, Emails, and Other:
Be real with students. Keep them up-to-date on what's happening with the marking. Go over any common errors or problems after each assignment or midterm.  Keep them informed about any new developments. I always make sure to explain WHY we did things a certain way throughout the course, or why we marked something in that way. Students like to be kept in the loop. I try to keep my emails professional, but just slightly more casual than a Professor would be. I've never had a problem with students being inappropriate, or being out of line. Give respect, receive respect. I also always try to respond within 24 hours, even if it's just a quick 'I'll get back to you!'. Be reasonable, be flexible, but let students know what you expect from them, and what they can expect from you.  At the same time, I ask students NOT to take pictures of my slides. I don't call out individuals, but a simple 'hey y'all, that's weird for me. If you come up to me after class I'll let you copy the slide" works fine. Never bad mouth a professor, even if the students hate him or her. Listen and sympathize, but never agree. In discussion tutorials, I try not to shut down opinions unless they're TOTALLY off base. A "That's interesting, what do you all think?" can help foster discussion and re-direct, or a "Hmm, you're not the right track, but not quite there...".  Accept that you will mess up. More than once.
In the first course I ever TA'd, I was doing a (very simple) calculation on the board... and got it wrong. Erased it, went through it again.... and the answer was still wrong.  I admitted that it had been a long day, laughed it off, and we carried on... even though I was dying inside. Those students still gave me great reviews. It's okay not to know everything, it's okay to mess up, and it's especially okay (in broad 1st year courses) to admit that a particular area isn't your strongest point.  I've had my heel break in the middle of lecturing. I've dropped stuff all over the floor. Again, be relatable, be approachable, and admit you're just a student, too.  I once made a huge mistake with a professor, to the point where we had to scrap an entire question on the midterm due to my misinterpretation. I went to her as soon as I realized the mistake and admitted fault. Yes, it's horrible, and yes, you might have to apologize openly to both the professor and the students, but you're learning. It's OKAY. You're not expected to be psychically connected to the professor's thoughts. If you have a very hands-off professor who expects you to Just Know Things, schedule a meeting with them 2-3 days before every weekly tutorial session. Tell them what you're doing, ask them for any information related to midterms or assignments, and clarify concepts.  

Choose the school you want the most, and send your LoR that statement. They don't need to tailor their letters as specifically as you - they just need to know, in general, what you're interested in and where you plan to go.
If your statements WIDELY vary (like you're applying to study faunal archaeology at one school, but human variation at another), then you might want to actually talk to your LoR about that.

Choose the school you want the most, and send your LoR that statement. They don't need to tailor their letters as specifically as you - they just need to know, in general, what you're interested in and where you plan to go.
If your statements WIDELY vary (like you're applying to study faunal archaeology at one school, but human variation at another), then you might want to actually talk to your LoR about that.

Since I accepted my offer in February, I've pushed aside any 'PhD thoughts' and am focusing solely on completing my Master's thesis. I'm still in email contact with my PhD supervisor, but just some light emails about interesting articles being published, stuff in the news, etc. It does feel a bit like limbo, especially after working so hard on applications AND Master's work, but I don't want to shift focus until I've finished this last step.
As soon as I defend (in 12 days - ahhh!), I'll start selling my things in preparation for the move. Selling/donating everything seems like such a daunting task, so I've also made tentative plans to go camping/hiking with friends and let off some steam during those few weeks. I'm planning to move at the end of May. Then I'm mostly going to take the summer off, for the first time since... high school, I guess.  Over the summer I'll probably start reading some theory/background to my PhD work, have some meetings with my supervisor about the project/grant applications, meet the lab, etc, but I plan to keep it light. I want to take the time to get settled and get to know my new city, and just ease into the PhD world. 
 
 

I've joked with friends that applying to PhD programs has been the weirdest dating game of my life.
I thought interviews with POIs would feel like job interviews, but instead they felt more like "Do we have compatibility?" first dates. Meeting my POIs lab members felt like meeting the family-in-law, to see if they like me. Leaving my current supervisor and school for another program felt like breaking up with them (and I felt weirdly guilty applying to other programs and having the interviews in the first place).
...and then you go from a "first date" to a 5-year commitment.  It's just all around weird.

I've joked with friends that applying to PhD programs has been the weirdest dating game of my life.
I thought interviews with POIs would feel like job interviews, but instead they felt more like "Do we have compatibility?" first dates. Meeting my POIs lab members felt like meeting the family-in-law, to see if they like me. Leaving my current supervisor and school for another program felt like breaking up with them (and I felt weirdly guilty applying to other programs and having the interviews in the first place).
...and then you go from a "first date" to a 5-year commitment.  It's just all around weird.

I've joked with friends that applying to PhD programs has been the weirdest dating game of my life.
I thought interviews with POIs would feel like job interviews, but instead they felt more like "Do we have compatibility?" first dates. Meeting my POIs lab members felt like meeting the family-in-law, to see if they like me. Leaving my current supervisor and school for another program felt like breaking up with them (and I felt weirdly guilty applying to other programs and having the interviews in the first place).
...and then you go from a "first date" to a 5-year commitment.  It's just all around weird.

It sounds like the new professor is already working on how to incorporate you into their research and their work life -- that's fantastic. Just because they're young and new does not make them incapable. It just means you're both navigating new waters, and you'll have to create your own path for how your Supervisor-Student dynamic is going to work. You'll need to be able to speak up for what you want and remind them of things you need from them, since there's no prior knowledge, and mistakes will probably be made by both of you along the way. The good news, however, is that a young supervisor likely knows how to navigate the Modern PhD World better than any established supervisor, because they just (successfully) graduated and veered into an academic career. It also gives you a chance to explore new research with them and start brand new projects, which can be exciting. And, since you'll be their first PhD student, they'll probably spend more time with you, because... well, that's exciting for them, to have students! I could be wrong, but I feel with a young/new supervisor, you're going into your PhD as more of an (unbalanced) team, rather than a defined "My supervisor is just my supervisor" kind of dynamic. You'll be relying on each other more, as the stakes are on: first time supervising, and first student that sets the stage for others.
You don't know that your supervisor is going to leave the university, and therefore there's no reason to bring it up in any conversation with them. If it happens, it happens. If your dynamic is established by that point, you may pack up and leave with them. It's a non-issue, in my mind.
On the other hand, an older supervisor brings to the table all of the experience. They know the academic world better than anyone else (but they won't know your academic-job market situation nearly as well). They'll have network connections and clout that could help you in the long run. Just because they're busy and in great demand doesn't mean they're a lackluster supervisor - you would have to speak to their current students and see how much emphasis s/he puts on supervising. However, it does mean that because they're established, you'll probably be entering their already very established research - this could make the learning curve smoother, but it could also put you as just a PhD student on their research, and not on your own path. You would need to speak to them and see what they have in mind for you.
I would just go with the research that most interests you, and the advisor you most get along with. If you end up with the new supervisor, you might want to put an older faculty member on your committee, or befriend them as a mentor to you as you navigate academia. If you choose the more established supervisor, you might want to get to know the older PhD students, or befriend a younger faculty member who can mentor you on the job market. Find your balance.

It sounds like the new professor is already working on how to incorporate you into their research and their work life -- that's fantastic. Just because they're young and new does not make them incapable. It just means you're both navigating new waters, and you'll have to create your own path for how your Supervisor-Student dynamic is going to work. You'll need to be able to speak up for what you want and remind them of things you need from them, since there's no prior knowledge, and mistakes will probably be made by both of you along the way. The good news, however, is that a young supervisor likely knows how to navigate the Modern PhD World better than any established supervisor, because they just (successfully) graduated and veered into an academic career. It also gives you a chance to explore new research with them and start brand new projects, which can be exciting. And, since you'll be their first PhD student, they'll probably spend more time with you, because... well, that's exciting for them, to have students! I could be wrong, but I feel with a young/new supervisor, you're going into your PhD as more of an (unbalanced) team, rather than a defined "My supervisor is just my supervisor" kind of dynamic. You'll be relying on each other more, as the stakes are on: first time supervising, and first student that sets the stage for others.
You don't know that your supervisor is going to leave the university, and therefore there's no reason to bring it up in any conversation with them. If it happens, it happens. If your dynamic is established by that point, you may pack up and leave with them. It's a non-issue, in my mind.
On the other hand, an older supervisor brings to the table all of the experience. They know the academic world better than anyone else (but they won't know your academic-job market situation nearly as well). They'll have network connections and clout that could help you in the long run. Just because they're busy and in great demand doesn't mean they're a lackluster supervisor - you would have to speak to their current students and see how much emphasis s/he puts on supervising. However, it does mean that because they're established, you'll probably be entering their already very established research - this could make the learning curve smoother, but it could also put you as just a PhD student on their research, and not on your own path. You would need to speak to them and see what they have in mind for you.
I would just go with the research that most interests you, and the advisor you most get along with. If you end up with the new supervisor, you might want to put an older faculty member on your committee, or befriend them as a mentor to you as you navigate academia. If you choose the more established supervisor, you might want to get to know the older PhD students, or befriend a younger faculty member who can mentor you on the job market. Find your balance.

It sounds like the new professor is already working on how to incorporate you into their research and their work life -- that's fantastic. Just because they're young and new does not make them incapable. It just means you're both navigating new waters, and you'll have to create your own path for how your Supervisor-Student dynamic is going to work. You'll need to be able to speak up for what you want and remind them of things you need from them, since there's no prior knowledge, and mistakes will probably be made by both of you along the way. The good news, however, is that a young supervisor likely knows how to navigate the Modern PhD World better than any established supervisor, because they just (successfully) graduated and veered into an academic career. It also gives you a chance to explore new research with them and start brand new projects, which can be exciting. And, since you'll be their first PhD student, they'll probably spend more time with you, because... well, that's exciting for them, to have students! I could be wrong, but I feel with a young/new supervisor, you're going into your PhD as more of an (unbalanced) team, rather than a defined "My supervisor is just my supervisor" kind of dynamic. You'll be relying on each other more, as the stakes are on: first time supervising, and first student that sets the stage for others.
You don't know that your supervisor is going to leave the university, and therefore there's no reason to bring it up in any conversation with them. If it happens, it happens. If your dynamic is established by that point, you may pack up and leave with them. It's a non-issue, in my mind.
On the other hand, an older supervisor brings to the table all of the experience. They know the academic world better than anyone else (but they won't know your academic-job market situation nearly as well). They'll have network connections and clout that could help you in the long run. Just because they're busy and in great demand doesn't mean they're a lackluster supervisor - you would have to speak to their current students and see how much emphasis s/he puts on supervising. However, it does mean that because they're established, you'll probably be entering their already very established research - this could make the learning curve smoother, but it could also put you as just a PhD student on their research, and not on your own path. You would need to speak to them and see what they have in mind for you.
I would just go with the research that most interests you, and the advisor you most get along with. If you end up with the new supervisor, you might want to put an older faculty member on your committee, or befriend them as a mentor to you as you navigate academia. If you choose the more established supervisor, you might want to get to know the older PhD students, or befriend a younger faculty member who can mentor you on the job market. Find your balance.

It sounds like the new professor is already working on how to incorporate you into their research and their work life -- that's fantastic. Just because they're young and new does not make them incapable. It just means you're both navigating new waters, and you'll have to create your own path for how your Supervisor-Student dynamic is going to work. You'll need to be able to speak up for what you want and remind them of things you need from them, since there's no prior knowledge, and mistakes will probably be made by both of you along the way. The good news, however, is that a young supervisor likely knows how to navigate the Modern PhD World better than any established supervisor, because they just (successfully) graduated and veered into an academic career. It also gives you a chance to explore new research with them and start brand new projects, which can be exciting. And, since you'll be their first PhD student, they'll probably spend more time with you, because... well, that's exciting for them, to have students! I could be wrong, but I feel with a young/new supervisor, you're going into your PhD as more of an (unbalanced) team, rather than a defined "My supervisor is just my supervisor" kind of dynamic. You'll be relying on each other more, as the stakes are on: first time supervising, and first student that sets the stage for others.
You don't know that your supervisor is going to leave the university, and therefore there's no reason to bring it up in any conversation with them. If it happens, it happens. If your dynamic is established by that point, you may pack up and leave with them. It's a non-issue, in my mind.
On the other hand, an older supervisor brings to the table all of the experience. They know the academic world better than anyone else (but they won't know your academic-job market situation nearly as well). They'll have network connections and clout that could help you in the long run. Just because they're busy and in great demand doesn't mean they're a lackluster supervisor - you would have to speak to their current students and see how much emphasis s/he puts on supervising. However, it does mean that because they're established, you'll probably be entering their already very established research - this could make the learning curve smoother, but it could also put you as just a PhD student on their research, and not on your own path. You would need to speak to them and see what they have in mind for you.
I would just go with the research that most interests you, and the advisor you most get along with. If you end up with the new supervisor, you might want to put an older faculty member on your committee, or befriend them as a mentor to you as you navigate academia. If you choose the more established supervisor, you might want to get to know the older PhD students, or befriend a younger faculty member who can mentor you on the job market. Find your balance.

Anthropology is a super casual field; almost everyone wore dark jeans and a sweater or button down at my recruitment day (at a top school). A few people wore casual dresses/skirts with booties, like you'd wear if you were going out for a weekend meal. Casual, but still put together.
 

You'll come across students all the time who don't care about your class. They don't show up, only hand in half the assignments, and are fine with their D-grade, as long as they pass. They're adults, and it's their choice. I only e-mail them if they've missed a major assignment or test (~20% of the overall grade).
 
I focus my time on the students who DO show up and put in the effort, but aren't receiving good grades.

Applied to only one PhD program, and was accepted into that program! Woooo! 
 
(although omg, the stress was unreal. Applying to at least one other school would have made it more manageable...)

Omg.....I got the Enhanced Graduate Scholar Award for Penn State...my funding offer just jumped...a lot...holy shit  (Follow your dreams, kids, and you too may someday be crying in your office unable to believe that people think you're smart and capable)   

Applied to only one PhD program, and was accepted into that program! Woooo! 
 
(although omg, the stress was unreal. Applying to at least one other school would have made it more manageable...)

Applied to only one PhD program, and was accepted into that program! Woooo! 
 
(although omg, the stress was unreal. Applying to at least one other school would have made it more manageable...)

The first thing I do when I wake up : Check my email &  Go to "Result Search" section and type in my field to see if someone else got an offer from the schools I applied to ..
This whole process is seriously killing me! 

The problem may be the difference between ethnographic and anecdotal evidence. Your professors may be trying to help students make the shift to thinking as qualitative researchers. I've had someone in my anthro MA who used anecdotal evidence to make broad generalizations that really weren't applicable. This student ultimately ended up dropping from the program after a semester because they didn't take qualitative (or quantitative) data that contradicted their anecdotal evidence seriously (leading to issues with faculty and low grades on papers from not properly supporting their arguments). 

You're fine. Honestly, I think it's rare for the majority of Master's students to have publications. A MA is only 1 year long -- that's not a lot of time to get something published, or even in the process of being published. And very few people conduct original research in their BA/BSc. If you have five things in the works, you're way ahead of the game.
Unless I'm totally off base, PhD admissions are really just looking for solid research experience, with some knowledge dissemination on the side - that you've conducted (mostly) independent research, wrote SOMETHING on it that was accepted by your university standards, and presented it at a conference or two. A few technical or internal reports never hurt, or TA/teaching experience. Just speak knowledgeably about your research in your SoP.

You're fine. Honestly, I think it's rare for the majority of Master's students to have publications. A MA is only 1 year long -- that's not a lot of time to get something published, or even in the process of being published. And very few people conduct original research in their BA/BSc. If you have five things in the works, you're way ahead of the game.
Unless I'm totally off base, PhD admissions are really just looking for solid research experience, with some knowledge dissemination on the side - that you've conducted (mostly) independent research, wrote SOMETHING on it that was accepted by your university standards, and presented it at a conference or two. A few technical or internal reports never hurt, or TA/teaching experience. Just speak knowledgeably about your research in your SoP.

You're fine. Honestly, I think it's rare for the majority of Master's students to have publications. A MA is only 1 year long -- that's not a lot of time to get something published, or even in the process of being published. And very few people conduct original research in their BA/BSc. If you have five things in the works, you're way ahead of the game.
Unless I'm totally off base, PhD admissions are really just looking for solid research experience, with some knowledge dissemination on the side - that you've conducted (mostly) independent research, wrote SOMETHING on it that was accepted by your university standards, and presented it at a conference or two. A few technical or internal reports never hurt, or TA/teaching experience. Just speak knowledgeably about your research in your SoP.