Eigen

I understand that you feel singled out, but I want to reiterate the point that as yet, she hasn't done anything that is objectively wrong. She's done things you feel are too harsh, or might have improper underlying reasons, but she hasn't done anything "wrong", in my opinion. I also wanted to mention that you emphasize here (and in your last post) that she isn't "constructively" criticizing you. My experience has been that the farther you go, the less this will be the case. While helpful to your self-confidence and ego, spending the extra time to compliment things isn't really the most efficient way to turn you into a better writer. Most professors I've worked with in grad school (as well as many in undergrad) work under the assumption that anything they don't point out is fine. And harsh criticism for sub-par work is quite common. Once you start grad school, the bar is often abruptly set much higher- you aren't expected to "pass", you're expected to do excellent work. I wonder if some of this stems from the fact that your first piece for the class was something you admittedly spent 2 hours on, and the lack of effort showed. Also, you mention that your draft went from an A- to an A- final version... How did you respond to the comments on the draft? Did she point out that she didn't like your argument at that point? If the replies were truly "pissed off", it may be because she doesn't feel like you're responding to critiques (ie, her comments on the draft).

See, the problem I see in this thread (and in may similar trains of discussion) is that people lump "graduate school" all together. While there are similarities, there's a difference between being, say, a good college athlete and an olympic caliber athlete. There are top level, highly competitive programs that are there to push (and create) the upper echelon of academics. Those people that love their work so much that it becomes their life- just like with any other top career (music and athletics come to mind). Then there are other, solid programs for people who really love what they do, but don't love it so much that it's the only thing in their life. I go to such a program, and there are a number of them out there. Will I be highly competitive for jobs teaching at a top-10 school? Probably not, but I knew that going in. I like my work, and I like to teach, and I would be perfectly happy at any of the lower tier schools out there. There's nothing wrong with "elite" programs that cater to and are built around people who are obsessed with their work. But those don't make up the entirety of graduate education.

Everyone focuses on the 80-100 hours per week, but the way I read the letter is not that they're expecting that from everyone, but that's what a lot of them did, and why. They even mention it being well doable with under 60 hours per week if you have constraints on your time. I think it's also worth pointing out that this is a top-tier program, and they're likely indicating what is necessary to stay at the top of the field. It's interesting (to me) that when musicians, artists and athletes are consumed by their work and are at the top of the field, we think the dedication is admirable. But when we talk about academics and researchers who are, or are shooting for, the top of their field having their research dominate their life, we think it's a horrible thing. Personally, I thought the letter was well written, and explained expectations without undue pressure.And unlike many top programs in the sciences, while 80-100 hours was mentioned, it was also clearly stated that the hours aren't as important as the productivity. Many other programs seem to hold the opinion that if you're being very productive at 60 hours, you'd be even more productive at 100. Also, in response to Emmm, they're saying 80-100 hours per week of time put in. Not 80-100 hours per week in the lab, or even at school. Most people I know that quote times like that are also counting time at home reading papers and writing in the evenings in addition to more "normal" days at work.

I'd also suggest that this is likely a problem far up the chain from your programs administration. But definitely tell someone!

Interestingly enough, everyone I know with a PhD in Chemistry that's in Industry is making very nice salaries. Where exactly are you guys looking for comparisons? And are you comparing all PhDs, or just those in Industry? Because the low salaries from teaching positions will definitely skew the results. I come from a family with a number of PEs, and from what I've seen, starting salaries with a PhD in Chemistry are about 50% higher than starting salaries in PE, and climb much faster as well. Sources: http://pubs.acs.org/...8710salary.html for Chem degrees. $115k is the median starting salary for a PhD, going up to over $200k with experience as an average salary. And the offers I've been hearing about for PE are starting at around $65-75k.

I try really, really hard not to work at home. It helps keep me balanced, and stop my work from creeping into all aspects of my life. So I've got an office at school, with my computer and everything I need. I do have a laptop and an iPad for working while traveling, and occasional work at home (it's not always avoidable) but I prefer not to plan on it.

I wouldn't say the department is completely blameless. That said, my (brief) experience with BMS programs is that they don't view their departments as separately as traditional academic units might. So to them, accepting more for a department than they might be able to fund isn't that big of a deal, because there are adjacent departments that have room. But also, I think this really highlights the importance of asking pointed questions during the visit, and specifically talking to each of the PIs you're interested in about availability of space. We've had students have to completely switch areas before due to lack of spots, so it's not uncommon. Personally, I think it would be worth waiting things out and seeing if you get into one of the labs. Talk to the PIs you're doing a rotation with, mention your concerns, see what they say. If it comes down to it, and you really consider it worth leaving over, you might tactfully mention that you really want to work in X discipline, and that if you can't you'll probably be leaving to apply elsewhere. It also may be that people from other departments are "competing", but they aren't really as competitive as you guys are for the spots, since you're actually in the department- but no one other than the PIs can answer that one.

Please define "research executive", as it's not job title that I've ever heard of before. Do you have lots of experience in hands on research? What is your undergraduate degree in?

This is one of those things you *have* to ask when you visit the school. Did they tell you specifically that you would be able to rotate with these PIs? Or did they just not tell you that you might not be able to? Almost everyone I know in grad school had some lab that they weren't able to rotate in, due to competition. It's why I so strongly recommend to everyone applying that they have at least 3 labs they want to work in at a prospective institution. From the size program you're talking about, the situation you're describing doesn't seem that far out of the norm to me. Some programs have been hit harder by funding cuts than others have. And as for things you could do, I can't really think of any. There's next to nothing a first year grad student can do to help get grants or really anything else to get funding, other than to apply for external fellowships. As for funding- you could certainly apply for an external fellowship- the NSF-GRFP leaps to mind, but the deadline has (I think) already passed for that this year. That said, since the department can fund you to some degree, I'm wondering if the reason labs aren't taking students is not being able to afford the stipends, or that they don't have the space/funding for additional projects.

One other thing that may help is getting together with some of the other people and trying to figure out what, specifically, is making you guys have trouble with the courses. One of the things I've seen a lot of is people without strong undergrad backgrounds in the courses they're taking- our department actually put in entrance exams to prevent this. If you have a weaker undergrad background, you may be able to go sit in on some of the comparable undergraduate courses at your new school, and see if that helps out with the material you're covering now.

My experience has been that even when the university offered married/family housing, while nice, it was more expensive than what you could find a little way out from the campus- and this was true across a range of schools I visited. Similarly, when I looked into getting my wife covered on University insurance as a dependent before she started her program, we found that even with the university subsidizing my insurance, it would be cheaper for us to both get another policy. And as has been mentioned, eating on campus is often always way more expensive than cooking for yourself.

Just out of curiosity, how would you see yourself trying to fix the situation? I'm not seeing anything you could do that would "fix" things. That said, I think at a lot of top programs, it's not unusual to have competition for "choice" labs. It's one of the reasons it's important to make contacts early with PIs, and make yourself as attractive as possible when it comes time for them to decide. I'd also guess that since only a handful of you are actively pursuing the coursework, that might also come up when it's time for PIs to select students. That brings up another question to me, though- why are only a handful of you doing coursework, if it's required? How are the others dodging out of it? Or are you just taking more than they are- maybe they got advised to pace themselves?

Pick one of the standard citation formats from your field, adhere to it all the way through your paper.

Almost any other option would be better than one from your TA, imo. Even for undergrads who have worked for me for years, I know mine would carry almost no weight. Personally, because of that, I'd decline if asked. It would be more typical for my PI to write the letter, based heavily on my inputs/initial draft. But, as mentioned, if you need it to complete your app, then it will serve that purpose.

It's more time constraints than anything else. Always new things to try, but it takes a while to use them enough to really see if they'll work out or not.

I think you're reading too much into the lack of responses so far. And I'd definitely try to call her, or get in touch with someone else who's in the department to check in.

From my understanding, it's a significant boost. You can say anything is in progress no matter what state it's in. And while you can say anything is submitted anywhere, it still means something that it's finished enough to submit. If it's actually out for review (usually won't take too long to get sent out to reviewers, I wouldn't think) that's even better, because it means that the editor didn't reject it on the spot, and thought it was worth reviewers spending time on. And then you can put "Under Review".

I think it's common in the early stages (grad school, post-docs) to include manuscripts in various stages pre-publication, because it shows what you're working on and what you have in the channel. I delineate on my CV between "in preparation", "under review", "in revision" and "accepted".

Would you mind expounding on why you like Papers more? I've been considering giving it a try, but the reviews on the iPad app seem pretty bad, and it didn't look like the desktop versions had any functionality that Endnote doesn't, so I'd love to hear from someone who used both.

I would say almost not relevant at all. Shouldn't be an issue, and definitely not worth taking the time to mention why you don't have it. That said, both my current and past universities would consider you not a full time student for the year with 9 credits in the spring. It would have voided eligibility for scholarships at my undergrad university. Just to give you some perspective.

I have mine by project, mostly. And then within each project, I organize mine by Endnote ID. It's arbitrary, but it's based on when I found/imported the article. And I can usually remember that better than the year. And it's easy to look up when I want to find something fast.

I work for a young (pre-tenure) professor, and I really like it. As mentioned, he's more in touch with the job market, the realities of graduate school, the high importance of networking, and he's very motivated to publish. There are some negatives (less established funding, potential to not get tenure, lack of name recognition), but it really just depends on your fit with them, and what you're looking for in a mentor.

I can't get away from print copies. I just do much more in depth markup on them, for some reason. I try to limit the amount of trees I kill, but I have unlimited printing and copying in my department, so there's no financial downside, per-se. I use Endnote to categorize all my papers (hundreds), with subcategories for type, and for anything I'm writing with them. I use GoodReader on my iPad with dropbox to view them, but for those key papers either for manuscripts I'm writing or for work I want to build on, I print copies, heavily mark them up, and keep them in binders on the shelf in my office. There are a few great past threads on different bibliography management systems as well.

Have you talked to your (prospective) thesis advisor specifically about time to completion? It really all comes down to how fast you can collect the data you need. The actual writing of the thesis isn't usually the holdup.

My understanding from friends in CS (some of the regular posters in that area may be able to correct me) was that comps and a non-thesis option was OK if you were primarily doing it for industry advancement. And those friends of mine who stayed for a thesis, by and large, had at least another semester past 2 years to work on it.