serenade

Not as in "Should I buy my advisor chocolate and wine or take them out to dinner after my defense?" but rather, I'm asking how to thank your advisor for being a great advisor while you're still in the trenches of the program, in my case, second year. I see so many posts on here about problems with advisors (which I can totally relate to because a host of problems with my MA advisor gave me enough of a headache every day to make me want to scream) but in contrast, I have the best PhD advisor I could ever ask for. He gives so much of his time to reading my writing, discussing ideas, and being a real mentor. I feel like thanking one's advisor upon graduation and in the diss acknowledgments is of course good, but what about during all the years in between before you get to graduation? I'm curious if anyone has little things they do to show their appreciation (I don't mean buying gifts or "giving" anything) that their advisors seem to appreciate? I know advising and mentoring grad students can often be a thankless task...I just hope my advisor knows how much I value him.

I'm in History but just FYI I scored in the 37th percentile in Quant and am in a top ranked program for my field. Buy a review book, take practice tests, but don't sweat it if your Verbal is good

The jobs you listed as part of your background sound like strengths, even if they're not directly related to the research you will be doing as a GA. I would emphasize the skills that you gained from them and how those skills could be of use in your potential position as a GA. Good luck!

Yes, indeed they do. As a self described one such evangelical, I cringe whenever people equate Liberty with evangelicalism's approach to academia. It represents one strand, but certainly not all.

In Theology, is it unheard of to have the bulk of a comps list be composed of primary (rather than secondary) texts?

Ah, nice to hear. Not sure if either of you are working in the early modern era, but even if not, any general advice would be appreciated. Regarding language skills, obviously learning Dutch is a given, as would be learning French, I assume. My questions are fairly broad and highly relative to specific periods and regions within the LC, but (1) How would you compare learning Dutch (from scratch) in terms of difficulty as compared to say, German or French?; (2) I know this depends on era and topic, but are most of the primary sources you read for the Low Countries in Dutch? Or French? (the latter, I assume, the language of the courts and administration and the former the language at the popular level?); (3) For any working in the pre-modern Low Countries, how difficult is reading handwritten late medieval/early modern Dutch paleography in comparison to modern Dutch?; (4) Finally, again, I know this is relative, but what language is most secondary scholarship on the LC published in? English? Dutch? French?

Any gradcafe posters out there working on the Low Countries who wouldn't mind answering some questions I have about necessary language reading skills?

Sorry to hear you're in what sounds like a very nerve wracking situation. The fact that you haven't been rejected outright sounds at least hopeful. I would assume that if you had zero chance, they would have already rejected your application. Hope the waiting anxiety doesn't overwhelm you --easier said than done, I know!

If your grant proposal gets rejected and the deadlines for applying to other funding sources have passed by the time you receive your rejection notification, is it worth it to fund your own research trip? Obviously not ideal, but has anyone had the experience of getting rejected and choosing to still travel to conduct research - on their own dime - as opposed to waiting and reapplying during the next grant cycle?

Do you have any idea if any of the admitted students who are invited are getting their costs reimbursed? When this happened to me, I happened to know some of the admitted people who I'd met at other interviews. Those who did have their expenses reimbursed were ones getting funding. If you don't know any of the other admitted students, you could call the department secretary and inquire how many of those invited are getting costs reimbursed.

If the school is willing to advocate for you, then fight for it! Since it sounds like this wasn't your fault, you should have the opportunity to have all your options on the table even if you choose to go elsewhere.

What period in American history are you interested in? For early America, UGA has Michael Winship, Peter Hoffer, Claudio Saunt (Native American) etc. who are strong in that period. But it depends on what era you want to study.

Yep!!

I remember how stressful those types of interviews were, particularly when they invite more people than they plan to admit. From my experience, I would advise to be familiar with the existing literature in your field that is related to the kind of research you want to pursue. Not that they will likely ask you directly what XXX said in his article XXX, but rather what you perceive to be the general trends in the literature and then how your proposed direction of research fits in relation to those trends. Not that you should have a super specific dissertation idea already in place, but rather that you have an idea of how the direction of your research can make an intervention, however small, into your field. I think they want to see that you have a generally solid understanding of what's going on in your field at large and that you realize the importance of (eventually) making an original contribution. At the beginning of an interview, one of the interviewers sat down and said, "Now this isn't an interview, it's just a conversation." I wanted to say, "um yeah that's a great line, except for the fact that you're judging whether I'm admitted or not based (partly) on this "conversation" we're about to have so um yeah....this is an interview." Ha. They can be nerve-wracking but it's important to be confident yet relaxed. Best of luck!

Yep, I agree with the above. I almost didn't accept an offer from the program i'm in now because of the town it's in. However, between living on campus and spending most of your time there, you kind of forget about life outside of campus. I've been surprised at how much I've ended up liking it, despite the fact that the town is a ****hole. But everyone's different and some people want to live off campus and experience the town, not just the campus, so ultimately you have to do what's right for you.

Current ND History grad student here. Yes, you're correct - the department sent interview invitations out today. The bad news is if you didn't get one, that means you're not in the first round of their picks. The good news, however, is that your status page does not say "rejected." From what I remember last year, I saw ND History rejection statuses on the gradcafe results page around the same time I got my interview invitation. So it sounds like you haven't been rejected yet. Among those at the interview in a few weeks, probably 40-50% will get admission offers. However, not all of those who are given offers will choose ND. If those people turn down ND before April 15, ND will then get in touch with their second round of picks. There are people in my current cohort who were not invited to the interview week but were made offers later. So don't give up!

Congrats on the invitation! I'm a current student in the History Dept there. The interview visit is not a formality. They will likely only admit 40-50% of the candidates at the interview. I don't say this to scare you, but just to encourage you to bring your A game to the interview. If you have any more questions about the interview visit or ND in general, PM me or post on this board and I'd be happy to try to answer them. Those of us who are current grad students get assigned prospective students to take to coffee/lunch/dinner, so I hope to meet you if our paths cross while you're up here!

I see. Apologies.

I think this a perfect answer because it's none of the adcomm's business!

Has anyone else started to think, "Last year this time I was starting to hear back about interviews, acceptances, rejections, etc...and checking my email every ten minutes every day"? Wow. SO much has changed in a year! For the better for everyone, I hope!

If your advisor is okay with you listing this grant, I think this is the way to do it. However, last year when my professor won a grant for me, I put it on my CV and he gently told me to take it off. However, I hadn't credited him with it like this, so maybe if I had followed the above advice, he would have been cool with it.

Just to chime in, I also was interviewed by random adcomm faculty rather than my POI. In my program, there was one prof from adcomm that interviewed everyone applying in "broad topic X" and then the 2nd person was supposed to be your individual POI. However, I learned (through exchanging emails with the grad student responsible for organizing the interviews) the day before I flew up, that POI 1 was on research travel, POI 2 had just had a death in the family, and POI 3 was retiring next year. So, I had non-specialists for my interview. At first I was concerned that the fact that they had not arranged for any of my POIs to be there was a sign that they were less serious about choosing me for admission than some of the other candidates. However, I still ended up getting in and I realized that it had nothing to do with me and everything to do with external factors beyond anyone's control. If it were me, I would first email the grad student/admin assistant/DGS responsible for organizing the interviews to inquire whether your POI could replace one of the non-specialists that you're scheduled to interview with. If the organizer says no, then I don't think it would be presumptuous to email your POI asking if they have time to meet up with you while you're there. Choosing a grad school is a big decision and you should have all the info you can get before making that kind of decision. (However, if for whatever reason you don't get to meet them, don't let it prevent you from choosing that school if you feel like it's the best fit. I ended up never meeting my POI [now advisor] until I walked into their seminar the first day of classes in the fall and it all worked out wonderfully). Cheers!

I remember feeling the exact same way this time last year. I had no confidence that I would get in any decently ranked school and was scared of having to figure out something to do with my life for a year if I didn't get in anywhere. That, coupled with some problems I was having with my then advisor, was really weighing me down. The anxiety/depression thing can get real during application season. It can really suck the motivation out of you. But, just this morning I was walking through campus of the institution where I'm now a first year PhD and I just sat on a bench in the middle of campus and looked around. I started to tear up thinking about how glad I am to be here and how much happier I am now than last year this time during the emotional roller coaster of application season (and advisor probs). I thought, "wow, if I had only known how wonderful it all ended up being, I totally wouldn't have worried last year." However, I realize not everyone's story turns out perfect and I understand reapplying next year may be necessary. I know it's disheartening to think about (I definitely remember that feeling) but I think one thing that helped me was thinking of something/somewhere I might want to do/work at for a year that I wouldn't have the chance to ever do again once I started the PhD/academia rat race. That way I had something to (mildly) look forward to if applications didn't turn out well. All that to say, don't underestimate yourself if you think you have a reasonable chance of getting in to the places on your app list. The school I currently attend was a "reach" school for me (I daily question how I got in but that's a function of imposter syndrome, I think). But things worked out better than I hoped and I couldn't imagine wanting to be anywhere else right now. I hope that in a year from now, the same will be true for all of you and you can look back and think "why did I worry so much??" Cheers and best wishes!

I could write an entire book on my opinion of faculty evals. But don't worry...I'll try (but probably fail) to keep this concise. To start, I'm sorry to hear you had a bad experience with this professor. It can be very frustrating. So long as you believe your professor can't reasonably decipher your eval from those of the other students, I see no reason to hold back if you have legitimate criticism. That's what evals are for, though as others on this board have noted, many students treat them flippantly. So in sum, yes it's perfectly reasonable to be honest and give constructive feedback. The story I'm about to share might well sound whiny and probably has zero relevance to anyone since almost no one would be stupid enough to do what I did, but I'll share it nonetheless as an example of when an honest evaluation is a bad idea. [This anecdote occurred at a completely different institution and with a different advisor than what I mentioned in a recent post on this board -"that one annoying student", just FYI]. During my second semester of my MA program, I was in a directed readings course with my advisor, whom I had known since my sophomore year of undergrad. He agreed to advise this course, but apparently planned on half-a$$ing it. I realize different people and institutions have different expectations for directed study courses. If limited interaction is expected on both sides, no problem. However, in my small university, close student-faculty interaction was expected. I realize that's not the case for every advisor/student and institution. That being said, in my department, if a course was in the registrar's system, the instructor was required to make a syllabus. My advisor did not make a syllabus and literally made the course up as the semester went on. I'm not opposed to flexibility, but he treated the course as an afterthought. He only required me to read three books the entire semester. I understand part of grad school is figuring out what to read on your own, but he treated the course so flippantly. I would submit a book review by email and he would take sometimes up to a month before getting back to me to say "read X next." There was no master plan. The paper I wrote for that course was one of my thesis chapters. When I submitted it to him, he returned it with revisions. Since it was a thesis chapter, I (stupidly) assumed the revisions were for the eventual, final chapter, i.e. when I was actually writing the chapter into my thesis. I didn't know he expected me to send the corrected version back to him before the end of the semester. Had I had a syllabus, or if he had simply told me, I would have known. On Friday evening of the last day of the semester, I got an email from him (while he was in Europe) asking me where my paper was. This resulted in me staying up until 3 a.m. making corrections to send back to him with profuse apologies on my part. He never acknowledged his lack of clarity. Finally, he never met with me. Everything was by email ("everything" meaning me sending a book review and him emailing me back saying "next read X.") No substantive communication. No meetings. Sometime that semester, I was talking to the department head and the subject of my directed study course came up. I casually mentioned, without really thinking, something about my advisor conducting my directed study course through email. The dept head became furious that he was blowing off the course, 'wasting' my tuition money (though I had funding, but it was the principle of the matter, I guess), and being negligent. So the dept head talked to my advisor, telling him he needed to be holding regular meetings with me. My advisor's response was to hold one meeting. For the entire semester. Not exactly what the dept head meant by "regular" meetings. My advisor began that single meeting with the words, "Well, the department is forcing me to meet with you, so....I guess let's get started." I know grad students are supposed to have thick skins, but that comment really plummeted my self confidence, which was already pretty low after he had been neglecting me. SO, all that to say, at the end of the semester, I wrote a pretty scathing eval. Yes, it was a stupid idea. I was the only person in the course! There was no anonymity. Yes, I was an idiot. But I was also 22 and foolish, and I chose a bad medium to make comments. My evaluation was actually cool headed and well written (admitted another professor in my department who was furious at me for attacking his colleague and hampering their "working culture," i.e. half a$$ing. The fact that it was well written, said prof lamented, would make it harder for the promotion review committee to ignore my eval). On the "suggestions for improvement" question, I suggested 1) a syllabus 2) a reading list of more than 3 books and 3) face to face meetings, with a few sentences on each. I thought I was giving constructive and honest feedback. My advisor thought otherwise. To put it lightly, he was FURIOUS. He was up for promotion from assistant to associate prof. that year. He accused me of trying to hinder his promotion and put his family in financial danger (which was doubly awkward considering I knew his wife and in-laws fairly well from a variety of contexts). He then told me he would be happy if I found a new advisor. To make an already long story (sorry!) short, my life was hell until I graduated. I cried a lot that year. Spent a good amount of time at the campus counseling center. Sweated out his upcoming promotion review like it was my own because I felt responsible for his job, family, and well being. That's a lot to put on a 22 year old's shoulders. All because of ONE evaluation (which I later realized by itself will not make or break anyone's tenure review). The short version is that he continued to hold a grudge, remained distant, and openly laughed when I asked him to hood me at graduation and refused to show up. However, despite his anger, he wrote me strong letters of rec and I got into a good PhD program. He also passed his promotion review in which the dean casually flipped through his teaching evals and didn't even stop to read mine (according to the dept head who told me this later). So all's well that ends well. (Though over a year later, I am still emotionally recovering from being on the verge of a nervous breakdown for nearly a year). I say all of this to say: the only time an honest eval can hurt you is when there's no anonymity and you are stupid enough to express your opinions through that medium!

WOW...that is spot on. Sounds like we both know Nigel. Many thanks for sharing. I agree about it often being males who are the culprits of interrupting females during seminar (I don't mean to imply that there aren't female equivalents who do this or to imply that all males do this or turn this into a gender argument in any way whatsoever), but it does seem to be true from my experience (again, others' might be different). And yep, I totally hear you - sometimes being pointed is just what you have to do. I think there's a difference between "pointed" and "rude" and as long as you're aware of that line, then it's okay to be direct. Because obviously it doesn't look promising that their self awareness is going to kick in anytime soon.