Marst

Also valid, but that speaks to the idea that she must have been very sure that she wanted it at the time. She probably started enrollment prior to second-wave feminism, and it probably was not consistently well-received by people in her life at the time.
 
Hell, it's 2015 and neither my grandparents nor parents understand why I don't want to live at home until I get married. 

Thanks so much for your perspective! It's really helpful for me to consider. Clearly, they can't cater to every prospective student, and I don't want to needlessly bash a school just because I don't prefer their approach. (: 

Good god yes
 

Maybe because that is usually something you don't find out until you visit and talk to people in person?

Way to pigeon-hole an entire gender (and you're working on PhD? And in education to boot???) Men often get flak for doing this to women.... like most fair-minded people, I'm all for parity of the sexes, but I don't think sexism is really what anyone has in mind. 

^^ Thanks for that perspective!
 
Sigh. His lack of curiosity about my work/studies is getting to me.
 
I mean, I even asked him about his work--duh, I know what accounting is, but I asked him what he actually does... and he told me about it and how he should sit for the CPA exam to have more work options (but is too lazy to). Um, red flag???
 
I mean, he's got no kids, no major obligations, and yet can't get himself motivated to sit for the exam? What's kind of funny is that on my profile, my personality compared to other women on this dating site is that I am #1 more ambitious than the average woman. Yep. Definitely why I'm in grad school working my butt off to write the best dissertation I can. On my profile, I write that I'm always thinking about... my dissertation! I'm not sure that I'll eventually be compatible with someone who isn't somewhat driven to succeed (c'mon, sitting for the CPA exam must be easier than writing a dissertation).
 
In addition--he never asked me about my work in return.
 
I'm afraid that he's just using me for "cuddling" (which I may not mind too much, actually, since I have absolutely no feelings for the guy).

Maybe think in this way: the highest is first, second is 2:1 and after that you have 2:2and then third and no pass.2:2 is what the majority of what graduates achieves. Or2:1. First is rare and difficult to achieve

It really depends on the standards the university sets. If you want to get a rough idea, in 2006 7.2% of graduates would have a 3rd class degree. Thus, a 2:2 corresponds to scoring at least in the 8 percentile of your year, if you don't mind the handful of people only getting a pass. It is likely that the university has higher standards for internationals, though.
 
By the way, a 1st is not difficult to achieve. About 15% of graduates have one. It is, however, much easier in some disciplines (e.g. maths) than in others (e.g. law).

It really depends on the standards the university sets. If you want to get a rough idea, in 2006 7.2% of graduates would have a 3rd class degree. Thus, a 2:2 corresponds to scoring at least in the 8 percentile of your year, if you don't mind the handful of people only getting a pass. It is likely that the university has higher standards for internationals, though.
 
By the way, a 1st is not difficult to achieve. About 15% of graduates have one. It is, however, much easier in some disciplines (e.g. maths) than in others (e.g. law).

Maybe because that is usually something you don't find out until you visit and talk to people in person?

How little I knew about the process when applying for a masters, and still got in.

@abberant -- I looked at the Wired link you posted and I am not sure if you are playing a joke on me or not. You can't be literally suggesting that I do what that person did.
 
 
I was sincere when I wrote my opening post.
 
The criteria are stringent because as a woman I do not have a lot of time to waste. Men can wait until they're 35 to look for love, but women just don't have that many years where they are fertile. So I have thought very carefully about what I want, and this was just an attempt to get the message out there.
 
I am sorry if my post somehow annoyed or offended you in any way.

I understand what she said, and I am indifferent what she said. Yet I find it difficult to take OP's post seriously, at "The Lobby",
 
 
 
Those websites and apps are more meeting/dating focused -- if that is what you are looking for. I don't know about Plentyoffish, but OKCupid, in my opinion, has a pretty good algorithm to match with someone that may share the same values and ideology as yours. If you think that you are getting too many irrelevant matches, maybe you should consider answering more questions and make more questions to be more important to you (hence your selection/screening process). To understand the general idea of how these dating website works, you can read the post about how a PhD student (at that time, in Mathematics) found his current S/O here (http://www.wired.com/2014/01/how-to-hack-okcupid/).
 
 
Those aforementioned criteria seems very stringent if you are intend to meet other grad students who are attending UBC / near UBC only, based on what you wrote.

Thank you.   I hadn't heard of Meetup before. I will take a look.
 
Sorry for being off-topic, I just thought that since this is a gathering-place for everyone who is thinking about attending or already attending graduate school, there might be a more relevant group of young people I could try to connect with.

Maybe I'm naive but I don't believe that everyone who does something I don't understand or says something that I disagree with or that's plain wrong or unpleasant is necessarily a troll. 
 
But yes, this board is not a dating service, it has a very different purpose.

I have heard of this explanation before and it may be true for some adcomms, but the reasoning still strikes me as pretty backwards.
 
Even with a master's degree and a few pubs, that's only 1-2 years out of undergrad. That simply doesn't strike me as long enough to set someone in their ways. Plus, most academics continually adapt their focus and techniques (sometimes wildly) over the length of their career. If that isn't set in stone, PhD and loads of pubs in hand, then why would a kid fresh out of school with a few pubs be seen as inflexible?
 
Also - I haven't seen the other side of this yet - but I imagine that I would prefer the most knowledgeable and demonstrably capable student possible over a less qualified one I could better "mould". At least in my UG lab, grad students are given enormous freedom in how they design and oversee experiments - and I'm not talking about crap side projects, but ones under big buck $$$ grants. Especially in a large lab, grads need to be self starters as much as sis possible for a student. 
 
It's also just good science to expose yourself to people with opposing viewpoints. I would want to know why a student reading the same research literature as me disagrees on x,y,z topics. It may mean I'm missing something or need to revise my conclusions. And if my procedures are stupid or inefficient, I would want that to be pointed out too.
 
Copy/pasting my ideas and techniques onto a student strikes me as boring and of little merit. I feel like the benefits of having a variety of ideas from different training and backgrounds outweighs the cost. 

U mad bro?

My doctor is the worst, and apparently unwilling to actually speak with me unless I make an appointment. When I was uninsured, my free clinic doctor used to personally call me with test results and follow-ups. If a free clinic physician can do it, why can't a well paid employee of a well known health clinic take the time?!?! This is why people trust the internet more than their own highly trained medical professionals.

My ex GF attended Hopkins for an MS, to the tune of ~$80K/year (second year was discounted 75%).  I am pretty sure the joke is not on Hopkins...
 
I was once told a story from a Navy recruiter:
 
A fire dept. has an opening, to which two men apply.  One is an experienced house painter who knows how to handle a ladder like a pro.  With his 20 years of experience using a ladder he assumes he has the job, no problem.  The other guy has never touched a ladder in his life.  When the fire dept. made their announcement, the job went to the guy with zero experience.  The reasoning:  his lack of experience meant he was totally trainable, that he could be trained to handle a ladder the way that the fire dept. wants him to.  The pro will be harder to train because he is stuck in his ways.  
 
I always think of this story when I read comments by well-qualified applicants who are dumbfounded over rejections.  A Ph.D. program is a training ground and it sounds like the example above has accomplished all that the program would have taught him and more.  What does a Ph.D. program have to offer him besides the degree and what would the program gain by having him?  Like the painter of 20 years, he's likely to come into the program with the attitude of been there, done that, now get out of my and let me work.  I know what I am doing.  
 
I could be wrong...just the things that entertain my mind...

Or someone's just full of shit. Occam's Razor 

Perhaps the only time I've read "UPenn" and "lower ranked" in the same sentence
 
 
^^^
(apparently not well received, but I stand by my statement: UPenn is a stellar institution)

I'm sitting on my three because I haven't decided yet (and haven't heard from everyone). I don't think people declining will automatically get the wait listed people asking accepted.
 
I seriously doubt anyone is thinking of you (angry wait listed poster) when making a decision that impacts their entire life. The schools give us until April 15th for a reason.

How terrified I can be of having time to (and no excuses not to) work.

Yes while it is very good that PhD's there are shorter I think there are many pro's and con's that need to be considered. As far as Master's go, I actually just contacted Oxford and they said that one would have to tale a MSC or basically a 1 or 2 yr master's if you do not have a thesis style paper (10,000 words or more) becaus etheir PhD requires you to submit a PhD style proposal, so for  us this is what we do in a regular US Phd in year 3, 4. 

Happiness is important; it can be the difference between finishing your program and not. But, it turns out people are actually really bad at predicting their future happiness, so it's hard to make a decision wholly based on happiness. 
What about school B makes you think you'll be happier there? Is it that other people are happy there? Do you think the things that they're happy about will make you happy?
It seems (to me) like school A might actually make you happier in the long run (better research fit, more resources,  and more balanced course requirements). Is there something about school A that you think you won't like? Are other students there unhappy?