Eigen

At least in my field, there are two portions of review- the editor, and the reviewers. You send your paper to the editor, and they determine fit, and whether it's even worth sending out to reviewers. If it passes that stage, it goes out to the reviewers that they select. The editor also does the basic checking- making sure it's not plagiarized, that all the authors on the paper are legitimate, etc. Also a huge name recognition barrier at the first step- it's best if the editor at least knows the name of the lead author. Rejections at the early stage are sometimes referred to as "desk rejections", and are of the form "This article isn't something the journal is interested in publishing". If it's something the editor is interested in publishing, they send it out for reviews. From what I understand about other fields, the process is similar, but I'm not familiar enough with it to speak to the exact details. Just to be clear, you're trying to submit this paper without having completed (or started?) your PhD and not affiliated with an institution or a senior researcher? If so, at least in my field, that would be a complete non-starter. It might not be so impossible in the social sciences or humanties, though. Someone else might be able to comment more in depth.

Only at one department I'm aware of. They're often not on search committees either.

Not usually. I'd say a straight no, but it might be possible some places. Instructors are usually a non-tenure track teaching only position, with no explicit research component. Many do research, but it's not a part of their official job description.

Here's one of the schools I was thinking of- Oregon State advertises redistribution of the fees as a perk to NSF fellows. http://oregonstate.edu/dept/grad_school/NSF_Incentives.php

Yes, there are precedents. I don't remember the schools offhand, but I found at least a handful of schools that put at least some of the COE into a grant account for the student. Mine does not, sadly, although there was discussion on the issue. NSF's position is that it's the school's money and they can do whatever they want with it. My department chair was in favor of it going to me as a grant, since the school was paying my tuition before anyway, but.... That didn't fly with higher tiers of administration. That said, all of your fees should be getting paid out of the COE in addition to your tuition. By that, I mean that any "required fees normally assessed to students of your standing" should be getting paid, even if they weren't before.

I think most people would probably lump that in with CV padding, honestly. Something you might be able to mention in an SoP as a major experience, or mention at interviews, but it's something I'd leave off my CV.

Just as a point of clarification, a xenophobe would be someone *scared* of "foreigners". Simply stereotyping them really isn't xenophobic. That said, I almost completely agree with TakeruK. The difference is, I think there are some differences in treatment with international students that are courteous- watching them to see if they understand what's going on, making sure they don't completely get left out of the conversation, taking the time to make sure they understand how things work. It's what I would appreciate someone doing if I was in a foreign country that worked differently. On a basal level, lumping people with similar characteristics is something we do to more easily process new events and situations. In my mind, it's not about an immediate assumption when you meet someone that is based on past assumptions, but rather how quickly you're able to adjust your perspective based on new evidence.

Personally, I think starting off in a lab with 3 post-docs and a PI would be great, assuming you like the PI and get along with them. You'll have lots of research based support getting off the ground, and a number of experienced senior people to go to with problems/learn from. A lot of PIs are much more hands on when setting up a lab than later on as well, so you may be one of the only grad students that will actually get to work in the lab alongside this PI, which can be a very nice and unique experience to have.

I think it would be wonderful, personally. Lots of potential mentors!

Beer. At least in my department, it's pretty much mandatory. Otherwise, I like to mix salty and sweet, nothin too heavy. Maybe hummus, pita chips, cherry tomatoes and some brownie bites? Depends a lot on your committee and what they like.

Just out of curiosity, how does "more than 30 minutes" jump from "10-12" to "12-14".... And an hour at the gym and an hour for dinner plus 7 hours of sleep with even 14 hours in the lab still has an hour missing. Also, why do you jump from my estimate of 8-10 hours per day to 10-12 hours per day? Also, I wouldn't say I almost ever get to put in 8 hours straight. I've usually got at least 4-6 meetings in a given week- some during the day, some in the evening- and a handful of seminars to go to. But I can come in, get something started, go to a meeting, come back and finish it up, work up some data, go to a seminar, come back and get things set up for the next day, and go home for the evening. And with a 30 minute commute, I use that time (when I had such a commute) to either spend time with my wife (carpooling) listen to NPR and catch up on news for the day, or listen to audiobooks. You make it a "fun" part of your day if you have to do it. 8-10 hours doesn't mean each day I'm working 10 hours. It means depending on how busy we are, I'll average 48-58 hours over the work week in the lab (8-10 per day + 8 on the weekends). Taking the upper estimate (58 hours) and subtracting 7 hours of sleep per night (49 hours) that leaves 61 hours per week that are "spare" time. Some of that is taken up with outreach and campus organizations, as well as professional organizations and "socialization", but that's still over 1/3rd of my time, at an upper estimate, is not directly work or sleep related.

The thing is, accepting *what* "kind of behavior"? People using "International Student" as a grouping? People saying that the majority of international students have trouble with English? As I said, there's a difference between those, and continuing to assume they can't speak/write properly after they've shown they can. A lot of our international students can't understand very, very simple sentences for the first few months (some up to a year or more) after they start here. And by simple sentences, I mean "You need to go down to the first floor and talk to XXX (our department administrator)".

No, I'm bad about my e-mail. Heck, I'll wake up in the middle of the night and respond to it sometimes. That said, most of the time I'll ignore my e-mail in the sense that unless it's urgent, I won't respond to it until the next time I'm in my office. I will scan them as they come in to make sure it's not an emergency (ie, half of the lab blew up, the refrigerators are out and we need to move all the samples before they thaw, something's flooding) or data that someone needs urgently. But I don't usually respond in the evening, or over the course of the weekend. I'll take care of that the next morning/Monday morning when I sit down with a cup of coffee at my desk. Also, of what you listed, I would only classify a portion of it as "work". So for me, in the lab sciences, I spend around 8-10 hours on the weekdays in my lab, working. Then another handful of hours on the weekends. I also do outreach to local schools, but I usually don't consider that work time. In other words, I don't let it cut into my research time. I'm also the president of our schools graduate student government, and sit on a bunch of committees- I consider that quasi-work time, depending on what I'm doing. I don't teach regularly (research fellowship) but when I do, I definitely consider prep and grading "work" time. I don't consider networking (socializing) work- I consider it something I do outside of "work" times. I think a better way to look at "work" is to set aside those things you consider essential to your health and personal life- time with family, time to cook good meals, time for hobbies, time for exercise- and make sure you've got time for that scheduled in every day. And then let the rest of your stuff fill in the cracks around it. As to the idea that there will be stretches you'll "work" 24/7, I just disagree. Even really busy stretches (grant deadlines, publication deadlines, etc) I think it's really important to make sure you're protecting yourself in terms of getting enough sleep, and enough outside stimulation that you stay fresh, and managing your time and work accordingly. If I'm having to work 24/7, chances are I've screwed something up in my time management in the past that's put me in such a bind, or I've not learned enough how to say no and I'm involved in too many things to maintain a healthy pace. At least in the sciences (although I've seen the same in social sciences and humanities) this is the advice I hear over and over from faculty mentors and given to new grad students/post-docs/junior faculty on the CHE forums.

The general rule in our program is you work the months you get paid. So yes, we work winter break. I'll probably be here til the 20th, take off 'til the 25th, work the rest of the week, and then take the next weekend and New Years off again. The unspoken rule is that we get ~ 2 weeks vacation per year- it's specified in some departments. Some PIs are OK with us taking off more, as needed- especially international students who want to go home for a month or 6 weeks. They frequently don't get paid for the month they're gone, however. My PI does specifically offer (at least for the summer) the option of not getting paid if we want the time off, although no one's ever taken him up on it. It also really depends what's going on at the time. We're moving into a new lab starting next week, and I've got a manuscript that needs a lot of work right now. I've had manuscript deadlines in early January the last two years, and that's really pushed winter break into intensive writing territory.

You don't generally retain ownership of a topic or where it goes on a discussion board. And you've made it quite clear that you, personally don't see the need for any more discussion. I guess I just don't see why, if you don't see the point in the discussion, you keep participating in it. Frequently.

I realize people can't just forget what happened, but there's a difference between forgetting and quoting an argument from one thread into a completely unrelated one. And giuyuighjjhf78f67f- no one is scolding you. Posting every other post with your exasperation at this discussion really isn't necessary. If you aren't interested in the discussion, you don't have to read it.

Are you trying to submit a paper to these journals? If so, I'd really suggest that you talk to a professor in your field that you know and trust, and get some in-person tips. Academic publishing is a long, drawn out, and fairly confusing process. That said, publications are usually a long turnaround, and even longer in the social sciences than my field. I'd expect to hear back from an editor within about a month to know whether they were sending my paper out for review or not. Then I'd expect 6-9 weeks for reviews, then there's the revision process. But this is all submitting to journals with my PI who knows the editor at said journals, or with invited articles. Not sure how much things would change with a "cold" submission.

Because I think it's something worth putting out there, and this seemed like as natural of a place to discuss it as anywhere else. By and large, this community "dies" from year to year, with only a handful of people that stay on. So yes, it would be possible to just wait for the current crop to move on, but after the events this week, I think it's worth pointedly addressing.

I think it's worth adding that this is the first year since I joined in 2009 that I've seen people this bitter and hostile. It's quite disconcerting. The forums don't have to be a warm fuzzy land of sunshine where everyone is supportive of everyone else "because we're all in it together", but they should at least be a place where disagreements can be handled professionally and tactfully without resorting to overt hostility and rudeness. Similarly, I think there's a larger-than-usual amount of cross-thread bickering. The best practice is to leave disagreements from past threads *out* of current ones. It's not always possible, but it really doesn't help things to come into a new thread and hijack it because you have a beef with someone from another thread!

To respond to the OP, and ignore the off-topic hurt feelings: It does suck when people make blanket generalizations. That said, this is one that I have to say has a huge degree of truth to it. Granted, it depends on the field. But a shockingly large number of the international students in my field (being predominately represented by two countries) can barely string together what I'd consider a cohesive sentence. There's a difference between a blanket generalization, and discrimination which is trying to make everyone that could fit that generalization fit despite all evidence to the contrary. The second is an issue I think almost everyone faces at some point, and probably also something everyone *does* at some point. The former isn't really a problem until it morphs into the latter, in my opinion. Also worth pointing out that you're falling into the same trap, to some degree- you've made a post in the IHOG forums asking how do "we" deal with "them". Such a post would be taken much worse if it was how do "we" (American students) deal with "them" (international students). Similarly, you're painting "them" (American students) with a broad brush and negative generalizations (superiority complex) based on a few interactions in the same post that you're complaining about "them" doing the same thing with respect to international students and a grasp of English. I think it would be quite helpful for you to realize that in the scope of international graduate students people have encountered, your ability to communicate cohesively in English is in the vast minority, and work to educate people that such a lack is not absolute rather than castigating them for not realizing it innately. It's just like how I respond to (the vast majority) of women who are excessively patronizing when I want to talk about cooking or raising children. I have to realize that they don't *mean* poorly when they say they won't believe I can cook until I provide evidence, and that they would never want to listen to a *man's* perspective on raising kids. I have to realize that they may have never cognizantly encountered a man who had these interests, and as such need to be educated that they do, indeed, exist.

To help this get back on track, I've removed the off-topic attacks that seemed to be the driving force for derailment. Water_rabbit opted to remove his own as well. Can we go back to the more esoteric and less directed arguments, please?

OK, I've been trying to avoid stepping in here, but can everyone take a step back from their keyboards and have a deep breath? I was really hoping you would have the decency and sense to do it without external stimulus, but that doesn't seem to be the case. This has gone downhill very, very fast. Econosocio seems to be taking this back on topic, can we please go back to that? And for the reference, that is not his sock. It's not tied to anyone on the board.

OK, I've been trying to avoid stepping in here, but can everyone take a step back from their keyboards and have a deep breath? I was really hoping you would have the decency and sense to do it without external stimulus, but that doesn't seem to be the case. This has gone downhill very, very fast. Off-topic posts have been removed, all around.

No, no it doesn't mean that. It means don't post something under a pseudonym that you wouldn't want associated with your real name. I don't mind posting my opinions on issues. But I realize that said opinions can be linked to me. So I think long and hard about whether something I'm posting is something I mind being associated with me in a long-term fashion. And I'm starting to wonder if you're posting while intoxicated, because your posts are making less and less sense as you go.

How is warning people that a public display of asinine behavior may negatively impact them a threat? And it's not exactly peeking through the window if you're having sex in the middle of a public park....