Eigen

My summer is the same as the rest of the year- our department makes no differentiation, other than the undergrads are gone.

That's not my direct experience with biomedical fields, so it might be a bit over-generalizing. I'd say posters are the primary mode of presentation for graduate student research, though. Oral presentations tend to be more cohesively organized series, where the presenters are talking about an overview of a research arc, rather than a pointed and specific project. I wouldn't go overboard with the poster presentations on the CV- I don't even include school-wide posters. Not to put down poster presentations at all, though. I've got a number on my CV. They're just not given the same weight as oral talks, in my experience.

I know our advisors barely read the dissertations in our department before they get forwarded on- they read them, but not the intensive editing you're looking for. That's something that's up to the student to do, or find other help with. I think it's key that you didn't think the work was your best. It's impossible to comment on the relationship as a whole, because we weren't there. Did you ask for more detailed feedback and not get it? Or did you just assume that even though you didn't think it was great work, that he thought it was fine? Advisors aren't generally (not sure what discipline you're in) supposed to help you with the writing. They're supposed to help you with the research. You may get lucky and find an advisor who'll work with you on your writing, but that's not usually consistently part of the job, from my view. As to how to deal with the situation: How do you feel about the revisions? Do you feel the work is your best now? That it flows well and coherently? If you aren't sure, you could try taking it to your campus writing center, or ask a friend to read it for you. I've done several reads on dissertations for friends.

Just chiming back in to say that you probably got lumped in with this years, and denied base on an incomplete application. Many schools have an "open" date, when they open applications for the year- usually around August or September. And they clear out all the old applicants before that, and start fresh. I'd just call/e-mail the program coordinator (secretary) and let them know what happened.

I'm probably a bad one to ask about spreading myself too thin. But I'm very active on the University level in our graduate student organization. I think how good it will look on your CV will depend on what you want to do after grad school. I think leadership positions look good for academic as well as industry jobs, and if you've sat on University Senate committees, it will show that you at least have a good idea of what academic service takes. If you want to go to R1 Academic positions, they aren't as important, mostly because of the time it takes away from the one major qualification- research. Also, never underestimate what they'll do unofficially in terms of faculty goodwill, if you have good interactions with your department through them.

I have a "Scholarly Work" section, in which I subdivide out publications, presentations & posters. Most of your other questions are an "it depends" thing.... If your CV is sparse and you want to pad it out, then put manuscripts in prep as well as university poster presentations. As you get enough on there that's weightier, you can start taking some of the weaker items off.

My guess is that the school's doing rolling admissions, and they've already filled their slots for this year. Assuming you're in the US, that's the only reason I can think that applications would be open for another couple of months. Usually, applications close sometime January-February, and most decisions for the next year have been made in April. My school technically keeps applications open (no deadline), but almost all the slots are filled by this time of year, so unless someone unexpectedly drops out late, or there's a fantastic candidate, you might well get rejected with a partial application in.

Nah, mine took. Or at least, it's telling me no plans. But I did see the extended deadline. ::edit:: You got me worried, so I double checked- mine are still all in the system.

The school would have to be willing to certify that you are making satisfactory progress to keep your NSF. They might be willing to do that even if they pull some funding. That said, under the terms of the NSF fellowship, the school is required to support your tuition and fees if they keep you on, so they can't stop supporting you and let you retain your NSF. You can transfer institutions with a fellowship, however. And academic probation by itself won't trigger your fellowship to get taken away, as long as your school is OK with you staying.

Personally, I would only contact the PI prior to admission if you have some specific questions (or can come up with) specific questions about their research. Another great way to find PIs is by reading the literature. Find articles that interest you, and then look at the PIs who wrote them.

I would say it's off base. High concentration of good PIs and high overall funding dollars don't really matter if they aren't in areas you will use, or PIs that you really want to work with. All that really matters is that the funding is sufficient for what you want to do, and most R1 schools (RU/VH) will satisfy that, imo. And that still leaves you about 100 schools to choose from. Even a lot of R2 schools are quite well funded, and have some very good PIs. And huge funding coupled with lots of students doesn't necessarily mean better individual funding for you then smaller funding with fewer students (more per capita). Then there's also a question of what size research group you want to work with/how much direct contact you want with your PI. Personally, it seems like if you're working with a well-connected PI at a smaller school, with whom you work a lot more closely, that can leave you in a much better situation to get hooked up with post-docs/faculty positions. In my program, a large group is 6-8 students. At most top schools, that would be a very small group. And at some, you might only meet with the PI once a year or once every 6 mos, with all your day-to-day questions being handled by senior grad students/post docs. As to whether or not they'll take students: my understanding is that most faculty in Chemistry are pretty consistently taking students relative to some other disciplines. But that's also a bridge you cross once you've been accepted, and are deciding between schools. My rule of thumb was that I only applied to schools that had at least 3 PIs I'd be interested in working with, but I was obviously primarily focussed on one each place.

I would do PhD program, and not worry about listing the MA. Once it's completed, you can list it along with your BA. For me, I have PhD in XXXXX, at XXX, In Progress. Estimated Graduation: Spring 2015 And I update it occasionally. I also have a blurb/abstract of my current research/dissertation prospectus, as well as the abstract from my BS Thesis.

You need to sit down and talk to your advisor, first and foremost. If they are on your side, they can help you not get kicked out (petition the dean, etc). If they aren't, then you need to talk to your graduate coordinator/director of graduate studies to see what your options are from here forward. Sadly, even with an NSF, maintaining it requires that your advisor sign off yearly that you're making satisfactory degree progress- so you need your advisor to be willing to attest to that to keep the fellowship. That makes making sure your PI is on your side doubly important.

NSF fellowships are done as an application for working in a particular research group at one of the Universities that you applied to. I have one (applied as a grad student), and have helped several of our undergrads apply as well- feel free to PM me with questions. You seem to be targeting "good" schools, which really isn't a good way to go about it. The school doesn't really matter as much. You should be targeting good PIs. For that, you need a good idea of a specific research area, or if you can't narrow it down, a couple of research areas. Then you find outstanding faculty with research that interests you in those areas. And frequently, a lot of the great PIs aren't necessarily at the top 10 or top 20 schools. All the credentials in the world won't really make up for a perceived lack of focus- you want to be able to discuss the research of the groups you want to join, and outline how you'd fit into that research plan going forward.

Between my stipend and what the university covers on my tuition waiver, I'm "earning" around $70k per year. Even in the Humanities, I don't think anyone at my school is making less than 55-60k including the tuition (OK, yes, Tuition is a lot!). But you can't really discount a tuition waiver, it's a "benefit", and it's definitely being paid. The fact that the IRS considers it "income" is definitely a mark in that column, as well. Sure, it's income that's counterbalanced by an immediate deduction to tuition, but if you were working for a company who was paying your tuition, it would be considered a taxable benefit. At my school, external fellowships replace internal funding (TA, RA), but the university covers (most) of your tuition either way. So you're trading TAing or RAing for a "free ride", even though the University is pulling back it's funding to be replaced with your external grant.

If you're looking outside the US, Leif Hammerstrom is immensely impressive, and seems like he'd be a great PI. Back to the topic at hand: I wouldn't sweat the GPA with the background you have. I would, however, make sure that you letter writers help where possible, to make sure your application doesn't get weeded out early at some of the high applicant volumes schools. I'd also say that GRE scores aren't *that* important, generally, but that in your case, a high GRE will help offset the lower GPA in initial looks at your application.

Ah, yeah. That's pretty much what I did, but I was paid off of a specific grant, and it wasn't as formal.

Ah, yeah. For me, it's always about updating the classes taught/University Committees served on/Outreach, as well as the "skills" section. In my discipline, a very comprehensive "skills" section of what you can actually do in the lab is usually quite important.

I have no idea what an early bird program is, specifically, but I started early and really liked it. I started in July, which gave me time to wrap up stuff at my old place, and time to move. Getting my stipend over the summer was very nice, as it helped cover rent, etc. and gave me more time in the city to get used to it before school started. It also helped to have two months to read background on my new research area, figure out where everything was in the lab and department, and get all my safety trainings/instrument trainings in, so once the semester started I was completely ready to go. I completely switched (well, not completely, but almost completely) research areas- large scale wet synthesis (organic) to biological chemistry with more of a design/characterization focus. It was great to have a few months without course overlap to read background papers, read all my groups publications, and figure out what the hell I was supposed to be doing. Feel free to PM me if you want to talk in more detail, as well.

Yeah, we had a problem with our waiver process one summer (and one fall) where it took several months for the balance to straighten out. So we kept all getting notices of finance charges, that eventually all went away when the waivers processed.

And I know people who get it paid in a lump sum once a semester. It all just depends! Also note that biweekly doesn't work out to $1250 per paycheck. 52 weeks in the year means 26 pay periods, rather than the 24 you'd think of by breaking each month in half. So either you'll get two blank pay periods sometime (it happens to me), or a series of lower payments (has also happened to me), or you'll get an even split over 26 pay periods. My school likes to do 9 months/summer differently, such that 9 months is the higher amount (20 even pay periods), and then the summer gets 2 months pay split over 3 months.

I'm amazed at how often I end up needing a CV with little warning (ie, not something I was planning on applying for). My PI might need it to append to a grant, or someone in the department for a grant renewal/fellowship application, etc. Never hurts to make sure it's updated at least fairly regularly so I don't have to drop everything and spend a few hours fixing it up.

I'd say a lot of this is field dependent. It's not uncommon for grad students in STEM to start early, and I wouldn't think driving a day a week to train would be out of line at all, and would certainly make a smoother transition into the next year.

Depends on your institution. Mine are paid every other Friday.

I update mine when I have something major to add (new publication, invited seminar, major fellowship, grant, etc.), or about once every 6 months. If I wait too long, I forget everything I've been working on, and it takes a long time to update it. It makes a nice thing to do when I'm avoiding some project or manuscript, but still want to feel remotely productive.