Eigen

Usually, they want GPAs for all schools you've attended. And you can find at least one story here from last year of someone with a sub-3.0 undergrad GPA and a 4.0 in her masters that got rejected from the graduate school (after the program accepted her) for not meeting minimum GPA cuttoffs.

I love my 11” Air. A bit expensive at $700, but worth it so far.

Since the OP is asking about meshing a job in with research in a PhD program where outside jobs aren't allowed..... And actually, on re-reading, I don't see anyone that looks to be talking about Masters programs in the whole thread, but maybe that's just my reading of it. But yes, all of this is for full funding. As far as I know, a school can't make you not work just by being enrolled. They can, however, make any funding whatsoever dependent on you not having external employment.

Just to let you know, "just getting a PhD" probably won't be enough to set you up for teaching or research. Positions in these areas are quite competitive. And an EdD won't do that nearly at all, unless you're at one of the top programs. Most EdD programs are designed for professional educators/higher education administration. As to the GPA: All of those are pretty bad for graduate admissions, and depending on where you're looking to go, might get your application tossed without further review if there are GPA cutoffs. Taking the usual weightings into account, your 3.3 in an MBA program is better than your 2.2 undergrad GPA, but not by as much as you might think. And a lot of schools have GPA cutoffs around the 3.0 range. That's not to say you have no shot, but you need to really have everything else in order if you're going to make it in- great past research experience, letters of recommendation, etc. As to USNWR vs other ranking systems: While US News uses a survey model, their methodology is quite decent, since they're surveying people in the field and hiring graduates from the field about their relative ranking of universities. While this isn't the most objective model, it's quite useful when you're trying to determine the reuputation of the university and the program you're attending. While it's not the whole picture, reputation of the program is quite important when it comes to getting a job coming out of the program, so it's something you should definitely keep in mind. And even though you didn't want any advice on anything outside of your GPA question, I'll mention that you should also remember that the most important facet of a PhD is the fit of your research interests (and by extension, past experience) with an advisor at the institution you're interested in. Hence, one of the best ways to find schools to apply to is to keep up with the current puplications in the field, and find out who is writing papers that interest you. I'll also note that just comparing stats vs. admission criteria rarely gives very good estimates on chances of admission. It's not how you stack up against the requirements, which are often set quite low, but rather how you stack up against the other applicants in a given year- and right now, admissions to most programs are the most competitive they've been in a long time.

It's just like any other job with a "no-compete" contract. Any employer can stipulate requirements for funding if you accept them, and if one of those requirements is that you not work a side job, so be it. As I mentioned above, most of the competitive national fellowships (NSF GRFP, etc) have similar wording that prohibits any outside employment without the express permission of the program officer/advisor. You won't find any other salaried, full time job at any company that allows you to have side-employment without express permission of the management, it's a quite common requirement. But then, lots of people get hung up on the "10 hour" or "20 hour" assistantships. A funding package is for you, full time, and includes your assistantship, tuition remission, and any other packaged benefits. And it's intended to go to someone that's a full time student, between research, teaching, and coursework. And most places that prohibit outside work consider it to be a full time job, which doesn't leave room for other employment. The point is that the assistantship is only a (relatively) small part of the duties that you are being paid for, although it's the "job of record"- it's just like any other salaried, full time job. Once you're no longer being paid for the hour, but rather by the job on a yearly salary, the type of work changes, and you're technically on the job around the clock as needed, until the job is finished. The point is that you could be making *more* progress on any of your other work if you aren't working an outside job, since that time can be devoted to work instead. This doesn't apply in the same way to other "free-time" activitites, that are required for a healthy, happy and holistic life. No one begrudges you for having a life outside the lab, but if you're going to be working anywhere, it should be on your research. And as to completing all obligations, if one of the obligations you signed off on is "not having an outside job", then you aren't completing all of the obligations. And maybe I'm one of the crazy ones, but I TA for free every semester, because it's a great source of teaching experience for my resume.

Unless, as in the OPs case, it's forbidden to have outside work as a stipulation of the department. And in that case, there's plenty wrong with it.

I think you have it nailed. It looks bad enough at the undergrad level when parents take too active of a role, and it looks much worse at the grad level. And there's nothing that's going to look worse than having them go without you, IMO. Having family come to visit to see where you'll be living and working is one thing, but you don't want it to be your first impression.

Unless your GPA is low engugh that it gets your app tossed. Yours isn't there yet, but above 3.0 is a good general rule of thumb. Your main problem is going to be that you want to go into Analytical. Since its a slowly dying field in and of itself, a lot of departments don't even offer Analytical PhDs anymore, which way cuts down in your school options. Seems like you've got a good shot, I'd concentrate on keeping your grades up as much as possible in e meantime- y don't want low grades to cripple an otherwise strong app.

If you refine and emphasize your research interests, I think you'll have a chance, but with a low GPA like yours, you'll need a decent GRE score to balance it out. But definitely work on refining your research interests more- that type of definition and fit, coupled with related research experience, is what makes you most competitive.The areas you're currently listing are about as far spread as possible (see theoretical vs analytical- we laugh about theoretical being the anti-analytical chemistry). And as for "quantum chemistry", I'm not exactly sure what sub-field you're trying to describe- there are a number of possible applications of QM to chemistry, but they're separate and distinct areas. Quite honestly, any chemist at the graduate level should have a decent and workable knowledge of applied QM, as prevalent as modeling and computational chemistry are becoming. This paper your lab just submitted- I assume you're an author? Preferably high up on the author list?

So some things to worry about (other than already mentioned): House sitting on the market- the last house we were selling sat on the market for 3 years. Consider whether you can have your money tied up in it for that long. Not only that, but you'll be responsible for the house, upkeep, etc. during that time, even if you're accross the country/out of the country doing post-doctoral work. Repairs- generally, a good estimate is 2-5% of the cost of the house per year, on average, in repair costs. There are the low-cost plumbing and electrical repairs, and then the much higher "need a new roof every 5-10 years" costs. And also the potential for much larger failures. They usually aren't evenly spread, but do even out to about 2-5% per year over time. Upkeep- putting this separately, but there is also the yearly upkeep. Termite inspections+certificates, property tax, and then of course, homeowners insurrance. At least where I am, homeowners insurrance and property tax are expensive- like really expensive. Don't underestimate them. Downpayment- last time I looked, most banks wanted a 25%-ish downpayment. That's a lot of capital to come up with at once. Depending on your credit score, it might be better or worse. And I'll agree with everyone else that I'd be really leery of paying 60k for a house in an area that's renting for $1000 a month.... That's so underpriced that I'd want to know what was wrong with it. Around here, rent's about that or a little cheaper, and you *might* find a 1-bedroom, tiny house with no yard for around $200k. Less than that, and you're looking at places that are an hours drive from campus out in the suburbs (where rent's $300 a month), condemned, or in the really, really bad parts of town. Even townhouses/condos are going for upwards of 200k, mostly. And as to fixing up foreclosures- keep in mind that grad school is already a more-than-full-time job. Even if you have the ability to do the remodeling, will you have the time, energy, and desire?

Hah. Not even close. That's a bit under what my tuition is, though. I was just using typical examplesn for tuition and stipends in chemistry and related fields averaged over several universities. I think some of the Ivies fund close to 40k in chemistry, though. Sime of the big state schools as well. And the DoD SMART grant is a bit over 40k per year.

Quite true. RAs won't matter as much, some TAshios come from the school, howevere, and those sometimes can get pulled following someone pulling out late.

Note that in some circumstances, a school can't give a funding offer that they gave to you to another student if you decline after April 15th... So you effectively make them have 1 less student for the next years class.

Can you give some examples of fellowships that aren't taxable as personal income? I'm not aware of any. There are plenty that you can probably get away with not paying (don't show up on W2s or 1098s), but that doesn't mean they aren't taxable as personal income, they just have to be self-reported.

It's quite frowned upon at our school. Most departments had policies against having an outside job concurrent with any university funding (including tuission remission), and now the graduate school as a whole has added a section forbidding outside jobs without the direct permission of the dean/department chair. Most of the large-scale national fellowships do it as well- outside employment is a reason to pull NSF or NIH fellowships without express permission of the program officer.

Glad you took the tact you did. There's a whole article over the CHE forums of facutly talking about students (undergrad and grad) bringing parents to such things, and it seems universally to make them think less of the student.

Make sure you ask around. I do have a friend that's working between two labs, and she runs into the problem that both professors seem to assume that if she's not working in their lab, she's not working- and it's leading her to work almost double the hours of anyone else in either of her individual groups. On the other hand, I know several other professors that I feel could very readily co-mentor me with my current PI without it turning into a "who's lab are you in most" competition.

TakeruK, Thanks for the info. That actually isn't so different from how it is in the US- the only parts of any funding that are taxable (whether it's TA/RA pay, scholarships, fellowships, etc) are those that are not used to directly pay for educational costs- tuition, fees, required books, etc. Any funding that is used for required school expenses is directly deductible. What is taxed is the stipends that go towards living expenses, and any other income on top of school expenses. So as an example (fairly typical in the sciences), lets say you get accepted with funding to a private university, with a tuition of around $40k per year. You're accepted with a "tuition remission" and a TAship with a 25k stipend. On top of the cost of tuition, lets say you have ~$200 per semester in books to buy for classes, and another ~$800-1000 in fees per semester. When you go to file taxes, you report an income of 65k- the money the school is paying "you" for your tuition remission, and the 25k stipend. Then, you deduct the tuition costs (40k), the book costs ($400) and the fees ($2000), leaving you with a "taxable" income of $22,600. It's rare in many fields to have tuition charged to (at least) doctoral students, and while most schools don't list it as a dollar amount in the funding offers, it is considered "income" by the IRS if you look through their publications. This must be school dependent. Our TA/RAships do count as SS earnings. Fellowships count as "self-employment income", so you can "choose" to pay into SS or not from it, depending on your circumstances.

At my school, you just brought your final transcripts with you when you got there. They were part of the packet of paperwork you filled out when you started, along with all of your employment paperwork.

I'd say probably less than 20% or so of STEM PhDs work in academia. Before you think about getting the degree, I'd do a lot more research into what exactly you can do with it. If you want to work in Pharma, you should really start making some contacts there- they'll be able to tell you a lot more about the best course. All of the researchers in industry I know have PhDs, and the friends I have without them primarily do labtech type work, not independent research projects.

Technically, the IRS regards tuition remission as income. But it works out as a wash. For me, I report 40k of income from the tuition remission, and then a 40k deduction for tuition payment. But I definitely get your point about the encouragement to go into grad school. I just personally think it should come in higher stipends + more funding for grad school. It's what we've been pushing for at our school- more direct funding, less "benefits". I have an external fellowship as well, and I know all of the Federal programs (NSF, NIH, etc.) are very extensively clear I that they aren't intended to be tax free. So I get your point about not working for the school- I don't, they dont file aW2 on me etc. but on the other hand, I'm considered an independent contractor, and as such report the income as if I were self employed. And while I see your point about relative amounts, I think a lot of funding agencies count on post-tax income, not per-tax, just like most other employers, but I'm sure there are some that don't. And I completely agree about the petition- it wasn't my intention to say that you should give me, or anyone else a "reason" to sign, but rather start a discussion about the movement, or even to discourage any that feels strongly about it from signing.

You're associating a PhD too heavily with academia. Ask some people in industry how valuable an MS is vs a BS- the projections/average earnings that I've seen suggest that it's really not worth it to continue on the the MS, that the jobs you get are primarily the same, and the pay increase is minor relative to the 2-3 year head start on earning that you'll get going to work straight with a BS. You probably won't be working in an academic lab with an MS either way- and most of the examples you give above are for that. Even in academia, there are always "staff researcher" positions at larger labs, where you're basically just focussing on the research, and not on teaching, grant writing, etc. It's basically a permenant post-doctoral position.

The advice you've been given is more applicable for PhDs than for Masters, but it still applies. That said, funding for MS programs isn't nearly as ubiquitous as funding for a PhD. Not exactly what you asked, but you might think on whether a MS is really necessary for you or not. I know in the analogous fields in Chemistry (Pharma R&D), there really isn't much difference between a BS and an MS- the big difference is between the BS/MS and a PhD. Neither a BS nor an MS will really let you do much in the way of independent R&D in Biochemistry, you really need the PhD for that. Following the above, the recommendations I've heard people give are to either stop at the BS or go for a PhD, that the MS really isn't effecient from a time or money standpoint. You'll make more when you come out, but not really much more relative to someone who started working with a BS and has 2-3 years of experience.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Just because a professor has power over you doesn't make it a "completely different situation". Heck, every professor has another professor in the department with power over them due to seniority of some stripe. It's not uncommon in my discipline for grad students to be part of hiring comittees and tenure review comittees, as well as department assessment committees. Grad students are junior colleagues, more than students. And at least in my department, there's a lot more that a grad student can do about a bad professor than an undergraduate, and certainly a lot more that can be done than just giving a bad evaluation.

At least in our department, with 1-3 grad students in a class, evaluations aren't anonymous at all. Just as advisors grow a thick skin to hearing things that don't agree with them, as a grad student you should get used to doling out fair and even handed assessment that you don't mind signing your name to. That said, she didn't really ask directly how you rated her. In your words, she "didn't get mad at you for your feedback, but wanted to know if you marked her highly in anything" (bolding mine). You didn't have to talk about anything you didn't mark her highly on. You just had to pick one or two things you did mark her highly on for her to check. And as to taking it up with the person in charge? If she thinks the person in charge was who mucked with her reviews, she'd want some kind of evidence before she went over their head. Grad student-facutly relationships aren't like undergrad-faculty relationships. There's a give and take, and it's more of a collegial relationship than one of student-instructor. Along with that comes the fact that occasionally your advisor will ask you for help with something that another peer might- in this case, helping her out of a sticky situation if you had any definitive evidence to share.