shinigamiasuka

Glad I'm not the only one crazy enough to keep a dog and a horse through the grad program.  I adopted my baby and he is really well behaved.  I live with my brother who comes home a few hours earlier than I, so I'm not as worried about him being left home alone.  I would like to get a cat though so he'll have someone to play with, and cats make me laugh with their antics.  But I don't know how responsible that would be given my financial situation.  So maybe after a year in the program I'll reasses and decide then if I want a kitten.  I also have bunnies to care for, but they are old, so I'll probably get something once they are gone.

I had a dog when I did my MA, and I honestly would never have gotten through it without him.  Every time I was stressed, there was Jasper with his crazy antics to make me laugh.  I was forced to get outside regularly to take him for walks, which meant taking more breaks and also helped with stress.  Every time I got home after a long day, he was there to greet me with such enthusiasm that it was as if Christmas had come again.  
 
Now that I'm going for a PhD, I'm once again entering a program with a wonderful little dog.  Daphne is the most cheerful, bubbly, snuggly pet in the world!  She got me through two stressful, horrid years as an overstressed teacher, and I've no doubt that she'll be the perfect cure for many graduate woes, too.  Studies have shown over and again the immense value of pets for both mental and physical health of their owners.
 
You do absolutely need to have housebreaking at least at a 75% success rate before you start your program, or else it will add way too much stress.  Also, it's a good idea to invest in a baby gate (easy to find at garage sales or on Craigslist) so that you can pen your dog into a bathroom, kitchen, or other non-carpeted room when you're away if it's for longer than 4-5 hours at a time (a crate is great for training, but if a dog is in for too long, it can have an accident and then get stuck sitting in its own waste -- this happened to me before and I felt HORRIBLE for my poor dog).
 
Also, another tip:  Build your study/work-at-home schedule around the dog, with walk breaks, play breaks, and training breaks built in.  This will keep you working in healthy chunks of time and will automatically ensure a healthy amount of breaks.  I'm a bit of a workaholic in academia, so having a dog really helps me to keep healthier habits.  

This is actually why I decided to get a cat last year. It was my last year of undergrad and I wasn't sure where I was going to be. I applied to both grad school and jobs all over the country where I would be completely by myself. I adopted Sirius so that we would always have each other no matter where we went. :3

This is, quite frankly, an incredibly rude and condescending response. You have zero clue about the OP's academic background prior to the MA but are asserting that the OP has never been able to write an A-grade essay in their academic life (18 years of education as you put it). I earned maybe 2-3 As total on papers as an undergraduate and still somehow (likely as a shock to folks like you, ExponentialDecay) successfully completed both a master's and a PhD with full funding for both programs. One can improve on their writing with time, practice, and critical feedback from others. Why not simply provide the OP with useful resources rather than tell them they'll never be able to produce professional scholarship? OP, pay the doubters/haters no attention. I had a professor who gave me advice like ExponentialDecay's when I was an undergraduate. Had I listened to them, I would've dropped out of college and never become the teacher and researcher I am today.
 
2 years of B grades in a MA program are not great. However, you can still improve, Francophile1. If the issue is that your arguments aren't strong enough, see if you can go to office hours and have a professor explain to you what else they're looking for. Is it that your argument itself isn't making sense or that you aren't providing sufficient supporting evidence for your thesis? I find that the latter is very common, as there's a tendency to tell, rather than show, the reader what you want them to know. If this is the case, you may want to add more quotations or examples from the text to bolster your argument. Another possibility is that they're saying your arguments aren't strong enough as a way of saying that your arguments need to be more nuanced. Are you arguing broad or narrow points in your papers? Sometimes it can be difficult to argue an extremely narrow, specific point so we go broader, which then leads to a weaker argument overall. You'll want to be careful not to do this.
 
Working--and exchanging papers--with your classmates could help you with this as they'll be familiar with the literature and theories you're drawing on in your papers. If you can, Francophile1, find a partner or a couple of people who you can share drafts with and get feedback from. As knp and VirtualMessage have said, writing is a process full of revision and you'll want to go through multiple drafts before submitting a paper. For example, I went through 8 rounds of revisions of my most recent draft manuscript before getting feedback on it from one of my peers. It was only after incorporating that feedback and reading it through another time that I then sent the manuscript in. Tedious? Yes. But I wanted to make sure it was the best writing I could submit to increase the likelihood of it getting published.
 
There's some excellent advice here. For class papers, think of the professor as the editor if you're following what VirtualMessage says. You'll want to go through several full drafts and revisions, get feedback from peers or the Writing Center, and revise again before you submit your paper. This means starting early on your papers (4-6 weeks before they're due if possible) and putting some serious time and effort into both the research and the writing. It is doable!

I'm going to go full grammar Nazi for a second. I know this is an informal setting. Bear with me.
 
 
If this short sample is indicative of your general approach towards writing - and I suspect it is* - you're sloppy. Your mistakes are technical and structural; I've highlighted both sorts above. In my experience, the latter tends to stem from not thinking through how you're going to say what you want to say, while the former comes from either laziness or ignorance.
 
Good academic prose is concise, structured, and grammatically sound. It is also the product of a great deal of deliberate practice. That is, in order to write good academic prose, you need to practice writing good academic prose. Fortunately, you don't need to wait for your next paper to start working. We live in an age centered around the written (or at least typed) word. This world offers all sorts of opportunities for practice, and forum posts like this one are one of the many ways you can improve your writing.
 
If you really want to get better, you should do the following whenever you write something, whether for a professor or for WordPress:
Stop and think: what am I trying to say and what is the best way to say it? Pay careful attention to grammar, looking up the proper usage of a construction (or a word!) if you're unsure. Re-read what you've written before posting. Proofreading is a pain for a long paper (I'm terrible at it), but it's easy for a paragraph on a forum. Make sure your grammar is good and your train of thought isn't skipping back and forth. This is really tedious, at least at first. You're re-training yourself to think of writing differently. The payoffs are, however, rather large. All of the professors who have supervised me have emphasized the importance of this sort of structure and precision for work done in class and as a method by which they evaluate journal articles. As one bluntly put it, "A disorganized and careless paper is the product of a disorganized and careless mind." 
 
 
*We can go into my own experiences of the overlap between forum writing styles and writing ability some other time. If this is totally off base and OP's problem is argumentative, he or she needs a writing tutor, not an online forum.

Honestly, you may not make a minimum cutoff score if they care a lot about verbal. Isn't that below 50th percentile? That could hurt you a lot. Your AW score is probably fine, and the rest of your profile is great. But if they toss it after seeing the verbal score, none of that will matter. If you honestly think you can improve your verbal score, I would retake it, and focus on that more than the quant.

GPA is far from the only consideration. What does the rest of your profile look like?

I won't claim to be particularly knowledgable regarding these topics, considering that I'm an international and haven't started the program yet. However, I have some comments based on the impressions I got during the graduate student visitation weekends and my own situation as an international.

I experienced that a large fraction of the incoming graduate students had, at least in my perspective, unrealistic expectations and ways of reasoning regarding their life choices. It was not uncommon to hear comments along the line of "It is reasonable to give up all my interests and suffer for the coming 5-6 years, because that will prepare me for a wonderfull TT position". I find this disturbing for many reasons, but in particular because realistically only a few will actually go on to TT positions. In addition, I had the impression that there was a general feeling, projected from both students and professors, that the academic path is the only truly honorable path.

I think these attitudes are different from what I'm use to from home. At my undergraduate university, I feel that most people who go into PhDs do it mainly out of interest, and that there are no particular "rules" regarding what you should or shouldn't do after graduation. Even though the TT job market is probably worse than in the U.S., I don't feel that people have the same level of concer regarding their future prospects. There are probably many reasons for this, one surely being that the general environment here is not nearly as competetive; however, I would not be surprised if the attitudes play a large part. Students know what they're getting into and plan their PhDs according to their personal desires and needs, and faculty tend to be supportive. That said, there is a fair bit of uncertainty and job market anxiety here as well, but it doesn't seem to be on the scale scale.

I got the impression that many students in America are going into programs with rather uncompromising attitudes, putting all their focus working towards an academic position without seriously considering other options. Additionally, faculty may be fueling this by portraying academia as the only acceptable path. Driven by these kinds of attitudes, students might be tailoring themselves for jobs that they likely won't ever get. I'm thinking that the biggest issue is that graduate studies are covered in a sort of lie, claiming that the purpose of the studies is to pursue an academic career, while in reality only a fraction of the students follow that path. If so, the attitudes need to change. Students need to know what their prospects are, and the programs need to adapt so that the students get appropriate training in regards to where they will be going after graduation.


On another topic, I've read a number of comments regarding implementing tougher quals/proposals/whatevertheymaybecalled to weed out a large fraction of the students after the first year. I'd just like to add that from and international student perspective this would be horrenderous. Starting graduate studies as an international often involves uprooting your whole life and moving to another continent, which is not trivial to say the least. Coupling this with possibly getting thrown out after a year would be nerve wrecking. The relocation process is hardly reversible; for example, if I had to move back after a year I would not be able to get a decent appartment, I would have lost a large sum of money and I would have to rebuild my whole life again. In addition, I might not be able to find a job/get into a new program for a while. I won't make any claims regarding whether such implementations would be good or bad when considering a greater picture, but I hope you will consider the situations of international students when discussing such suggestions.



As mentioned, I hardly have the experience to be an authority on these topics, and I'm just presenting my own highly speculative ideas.

To Ravyn: 
 
In sociology, we have a term "referent", which is a similar to a role model - a person whose behavior you emulate, or at least use to know how what behavior is socially appropriate. I suggest you start identifying people - PhDs - that you admire for their conduct, and if possible develop relationships with them. Having such people in your life will not only help you stay true to your ideals, they can become allies for you in your career.
 
Believe me, there are people in higher ed who are getting the grants and publications because they are really producing work that will help other people in the long run.
 
We all change as we learn and grow older. You will change, too, whether you stay in the program or not. Don't let your fear of change cause you to sell yourself short.

From the info you've provided I think you'll make a competitive applicant that can uniquely contribute to any graduate program. Many programs actually seek non-traditional students such as yourself that are high achieving and can provide a different perspective to the research being done at the institute. You are not too old or anything like that - if you want to continue your educational pursuits you'll be fine. 

As far as I know, most grants that professors apply for to fund their graduate students do not come with restrictions on the nationality of the graduate student. However, almost all fellowships that graduate students apply for (e.g. NSF) do come with such restrictions.
 
This makes a difference to the # of international students admitted because admitting domestic students means that there is a chance that student will win something like a NSF and reduce the cost to the department. But if you accept an international student, it is much less likely they will ever reduce your cost. This factor makes it harder for international students to be admitted in both public and private schools. (In public schools, there is an additional hurdle of international students costing more).
 
Also, as others point out, even though international students cost more, training them to be PhDs might be a fairly cost effective way to do humanitarian missions too. The US wants to send money overseas to help developing countries and training PhDs can be part of that mission. I'm certainly not qualified to comment on whether this makes quantitative sense, but I think it's important to point out / recognize that there is value to the US for them to train international students while also recognizing that international student admission should be harder because American taxes fund most schools.

GRE scorers (human and machine) like structure. So I suggest tightening up your organization. Here's a sample outline.
 
Intro: Five sentences introducing the debate. Last sentence should be your thesis, something like "It is no longer necessary to focus solely on cities when trying to understand a society because X, Y, and Z.
 
Para2: Topic sentence expanding upon reason X. Include one specific example and explain why that example proves your point. Shoot for 5-7 sentences (yes, really. The machine likes length).
 
Para3: Topic sentence expanding upon reason Y. Include one specific example and explain why that example proves your point. Shoot for 5-7 sentences.
 
Para4: Topic sentence expanding upon reason Z. Include one specific example and explain why that example proves your point. Shoot for 5-7 sentences.
 
Conclusion: Wrap it all up with a re-worded thesis and impress upon the significance and high stakes of your claim. 
 
BOOM. 

Same here, but I think it is just my confirmation bias. I would have sworn to the skies that "advisor" was both more commonly used and older, and was shocked to find that neither was the case.

I like advisor. But I occasionally use adviser. 
 
For one reason or another, I tend to use "advisor" when it's a title like our "Thesis Advisor", or "Financial Advisor" or when referring to people in these positions. I think "adviser" for just the general word for someone who advises? 
 
But now I will also think robot defender when I use "advisor"!

Disclaimer: I didn't see the original post before it was deleted.
 
Those who are saying that the professor is clearly involved *seem* to be saying it because she didn't apologize to the OP after the incident (whatever the incident was). I'd just like to point out that some people would have taken the professor apologizing to the OP as the professor admitting responsibility, so maybe the professor was worried about that perception of things. I can't possibly know what happened, but people are jumping to conclusions on both sides of this.

>>Inb4 why more PhDs is important in some other countries:
 
100% with Crafter here, but I'm going to add a few points with my country as an example. Bangladesh hardly has any research opportunities currently. It's us with graduate degrees and research experience from abroad who can help improve this dire state. Lately, there's been a rise in the number of people pursuing graduate degrees abroad. When they come back, they're going to be entrepreneurs, create bridges for collaboration with the universities they graduated from, help improve the education system, initiate new research, motivate future generations, better the economy, improve infrastructure, etc. I hope to be a part of a tech and research boom in my country.
 
Being a young country, they're also building new universities (e.g. my undergrad school opened in 1995)--both public and private--to accommodate the rise in population and %literacy, so the number of TT positions is far from saturation. I'm sure there are many countries just like mine that would benefit from more PhDs. So yes, taking fewer PhDs is not the answer.
 
It's not only about STEM fields, it's the same for humanities and social sciences as well. There's a bias towards STEM fields and the others are seen as "lower"; we need to improve that. Also, there are some fields (within the "soft sciences" primarily) that are either completely absent or provided at too few universities compared to their actual demand.
 
Additionally, where you study also influences you thought and approach styles. We've been staying to ourselves and using only our resources for too long, hence the education system hasn't quite changed in a very long time. I hope the current rise in interest in abroad studies introduces some diversity of thought and ameliorates this.

>>Inb4 why more PhDs is important in some other countries:
 
100% with Crafter here, but I'm going to add a few points with my country as an example. Bangladesh hardly has any research opportunities currently. It's us with graduate degrees and research experience from abroad who can help improve this dire state. Lately, there's been a rise in the number of people pursuing graduate degrees abroad. When they come back, they're going to be entrepreneurs, create bridges for collaboration with the universities they graduated from, help improve the education system, initiate new research, motivate future generations, better the economy, improve infrastructure, etc. I hope to be a part of a tech and research boom in my country.
 
Being a young country, they're also building new universities (e.g. my undergrad school opened in 1995)--both public and private--to accommodate the rise in population and %literacy, so the number of TT positions is far from saturation. I'm sure there are many countries just like mine that would benefit from more PhDs. So yes, taking fewer PhDs is not the answer.
 
It's not only about STEM fields, it's the same for humanities and social sciences as well. There's a bias towards STEM fields and the others are seen as "lower"; we need to improve that. Also, there are some fields (within the "soft sciences" primarily) that are either completely absent or provided at too few universities compared to their actual demand.
 
Additionally, where you study also influences you thought and approach styles. We've been staying to ourselves and using only our resources for too long, hence the education system hasn't quite changed in a very long time. I hope the current rise in interest in abroad studies introduces some diversity of thought and ameliorates this.

I do the following things mostly out of necessity, but they do save money which is a nice bonus!
 
-I cook almost all of my meals.  It's extraordinarily rare for me to eat out.
 
-I walk everywhere.  Where I live now, I don't need a car to get around.  I can also get most places without using public transportation. Not only does it save me money, but it's good exercise!
 
-I don't drink.
 
-I don't have cable.
 
Another way to save money, which I don't currently do enough, is pricing around and couponing. It's amazing how much money this can save over time.  My mom was like a coupon master when I was little.  She saved incredible amounts of money by painstakingly finding which stores had the cheapest option and using coupons for everything.  I don't think she bought anything without a coupon for it.

>>Inb4 why more PhDs is important in some other countries:
 
100% with Crafter here, but I'm going to add a few points with my country as an example. Bangladesh hardly has any research opportunities currently. It's us with graduate degrees and research experience from abroad who can help improve this dire state. Lately, there's been a rise in the number of people pursuing graduate degrees abroad. When they come back, they're going to be entrepreneurs, create bridges for collaboration with the universities they graduated from, help improve the education system, initiate new research, motivate future generations, better the economy, improve infrastructure, etc. I hope to be a part of a tech and research boom in my country.
 
Being a young country, they're also building new universities (e.g. my undergrad school opened in 1995)--both public and private--to accommodate the rise in population and %literacy, so the number of TT positions is far from saturation. I'm sure there are many countries just like mine that would benefit from more PhDs. So yes, taking fewer PhDs is not the answer.
 
It's not only about STEM fields, it's the same for humanities and social sciences as well. There's a bias towards STEM fields and the others are seen as "lower"; we need to improve that. Also, there are some fields (within the "soft sciences" primarily) that are either completely absent or provided at too few universities compared to their actual demand.
 
Additionally, where you study also influences you thought and approach styles. We've been staying to ourselves and using only our resources for too long, hence the education system hasn't quite changed in a very long time. I hope the current rise in interest in abroad studies introduces some diversity of thought and ameliorates this.

Reducing the PhD slots to "secure TT jobs" sound to me like a rather outdated thinking.
 
At least in my field, a PhD is somewhat standard requirement when applying to higher salary jobs, either at academia, industry or policy.
 
While I was looking for a position, right after finishing my MS, I found myself in a bad situation where many jobs required either a PhD or an MS plus X years of experience. I was in neither of such categories.
 
So, as someone mentioned before, the ultimate goal to pursue a PhD varies from individuals, and to me, it looks like the PhD students wishing to get a TT position is not as common as it could have been in the past (just my impression, though). When I told a friend of mine about my idea of going back to school for a PhD, he said something like "there are way too many PhDs looking for a job right now. Do you really think it may help you?". Well, I think it will. Anyway, what else a recent PhD graduate will do after their program completion if not looking for a job??
 
Thinking in such a way would imply that everybody with a PhD, working as Staff Scientist at some biotech firm, Senior Program Officer at some nonprofit or governmental organization, Research Associate, etc are there because they didn't make it into Academia. I don't believe that is true.
 
There is also another thing to consider: international applicants.
It is hard to get into a PhD program as it is now (mostly due to funding issues, if you do not come with your own money or a scholarship from your country). Reducing the number of PhD admissions will severely hurt most international applicant's chances.
 
The above issue may seem irrelevant to many, but it goes beyond Diversity. It will hurt global Science Advancement. In many cases, PhD programs are not offered in our home countries and that's why we need to study abroad. But upon returning home, the ones with the degree and research experience in other countries (the US, in this particular case) are responsible for technology transfer, training staff and getting some science done. In my field, biomedical sciences, it is very common that the topics of high research and funding in the US are causes of death in here and an local ongoing production of scientific data in the subject is paramount.

No, I do not know any Latin. I will concede that I cannot fully judge Latin's usefulness without having taken the course myself. But at the same time, I can still partially judge it based on my personal opinion of what a high school diploma should bestow the graduate with and what I see are desired skills in jobs past high school. For example, in my hometown, the desired languages are English and Cantonese (Mandarin is a close 3rd choice). Learning Latin is not going to help a graduate from my high school find work.
 
Public high schools in Canada (or at least in British Columbia, my home province, since education is a provincial responsibility, not national) does not include Latin or Calculus or any of these specific skills in our core curriculum. And I think that's the right decision. Our school system has found a decent balance between "teaching general knowledge" and "offering advanced topics for motivated students" through what our system calls "Board/Authority Authorized Courses" (BAAC). BAACs allows for schools to offer specific special courses that will be allowed to count towards a high school diploma if there is both interest and expertise. Unlike the "regular" courses, the BAACs do not follow a province-wide curriculum and schools are not required to offer them. But if there is interest from students and a teacher willing to develop the course material and teach it, then the school can submit the course plan for approval/authorization.
 
I'm sure the regulations have changed a bit since I was in high school, but I vaguely remember there being some limit on the number of BAACs you can count towards your diploma (to ensure that every student in the province has some minimum standard). At my school, some examples of BAACs are:
 
Calculus, Psychology, Animation (computer), Business classes (e.g. we had an entrepreneurship class where the class runs the school store), advanced art classes (e.g. Photography) , Fitness, Journalism, Yearbook, Peer Mentoring, Creative Writing etc.
 
I do think it is important for schools to do more than just meet minimum standards. But I think Calculus, Latin, and other topics mentioned above does not have to be part of a set of core courses offered by every high school. And, more broadly speaking, I do think that we should move public high school away from being simply college prep and instead, teach more basic concepts that have everyday application to students who don't go on to college, much less graduate school. I would much rather prefer to see fundamental skills like critical thinking and understanding of statistics taught as core courses rather than Calculus or Latin.
 
But to be clear, I do want public schools to be able to get approval to teach Calculus or Latin if they wanted to, just not be required to. The downside of going all the way to just "basic general knowledge" in high school is that some students from less academic backgrounds might never be exposed to some of these "specific" skills/knowledge and thus might never find that spark or inspiration that gets them to go to college and higher learning. So I personally think the combination of "general knowledge" being the only requirement with optional "special skills" depending on approval/interest is a good balance to ensure public high schools meet the needs of the community as well as being stimulating for students with specialized interests.

The first thing that jumps out at me is you are unfocused - police department, research, retail, admin assistant. You need to tailor your job search to one area that you are (1) interested in and (2) qualified for. Second, if you have applied for 100+ jobs you are qualified for and only received 1 interview then something is wrong with your resume, cover letter, or both.
 
College career centers are the worst for advice. I recommend reading the sections of resumes, cover letters, and interviewing at Ask a Manager.
 
I have a BS in sociology and upon graduation it took me a year to get a job. I applied to a ton of places and could not even get an interview. I did a lot of research online and realized I was coming across as unfocused and my resume and cover letter had issues. Once I fixed that I started getting interviews and then was offered a job.
 
Good luck!

Quick, without Googling it, do you know who Shelby Hunt is?
 
No?  He was one of the top marketing researchers of the past 50 years.  They are considering renaming the top marketing award after him because of how much he contributed to the marketing field. (He was also my dad's POI)
 
Guess what?  No one outside his industry would know him from Adam.  It isn't like we are really superstars.  I mean, some people think it is cool if you have Dr. in front of your name, but they don't really know what you do.  And inside your industry, just be who you are.  Now, there are a lot of people who do get puffed up, but most of the time that only leads to bitter disappointment.
 
We need more people in academia who don't do it for the praise of others, and who realize they are not a god.

No, not at all weird. Having the same issue. No one has said anything bad about my application, and a lot of people say that my academic record is very strong (not just grades, but research experience).
But, to put things in perspective--The program has seen many applications and their academic history while, for the most part, we only know ourselves.
 
In some ways, I.S. pushes us to say "I do not know everything." That statement is not the endpoint--it encourages us to know more and to keep the imposter at bay. Right now I'm taking a Coursera class on epigenetic control because I want to learn more about the work that I will be doing.

Is it weird that my imposter syndrome seems to be coming from people saying positive things about me? The program I'm attending was very flattering in their recruitment of me, and it makes me feel like I must have been oversold, or they must have misunderstood my application package in some way, etc. Even my current professors' encouragement just makes these feelings more intense. It's making me pretty anxious, feeling like I have to live up to this inflated expectation of me.