Jump to content

eternallyephemeral

Members
  • Posts

    275
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by eternallyephemeral

  1. When you make a big change, it's common to question it and wonder if you're as happy or engaged as you thought you would be. But the truth is, we often aren't. I just moved for an IO program as well, and it came with a lot of life changes. The city (if you can call it that) is a lot smaller, the transportation system is pretty bad, there isn't anything to do, people have been nice but it doesn't really go beyond that, and everything is generally quite boring. If I focused on that aspect, I would definitely be second-guessing my decision. However, I'm focusing on the good parts. I got some cats, and they help me wind down and stay mentally sane. I power through the readings, and I try to focus on the end goal. I've been looking for positive aspects of the city, and I'm trying to do things I wouldn't before to make the most of it. If it's only been a week and it's not an amazing wonderful party and the research material isn't everything you dreamed of, that's how life is. Now, no one can tell you it was worth leaving everything behind, but if this is going to benefit you in some way, then it's likely best to stick with it. Sometimes you have to just decide that you like something, and then you'll find yourself liking it. I'm pretty sure everyone's mind wanders when reading papers. I'm also not engaged at all in classes like stats, where it's super boring and repetitive. But that's just school. That's what everyone's experiencing.
  2. You shouldn't go to grad school just because people told you to. You shouldn't go to grad school if you realize that you want to even less now than before doing an MA. You shouldn't go to graduate school with the sole goal of writing books, because it's untrue that you will only be able to write if you're in a PhD. And that last one has so many questions. Can you only write when you're in the PhD? Don't you want to get out eventually? Does that mean later you can't write? What does institutional backing have to do with you writing a book? Do they think it will make it easier to publish it? Are they saying you can only write books if you're a professor, meaning you have to go through the PhD and then try to get a professorial job (which is extremely difficult) to then write a freaking book? Anyone can write a book. In any position. At any life stage. You don't need institutional backing, a PhD, or even your own computer. Now, if you want to only write and do nothing else, and financially support yourself, obviously that is difficult. But a PhD won't solve that problem for you.
  3. First of all, this whole dating undergrads goal you have is a disaster waiting to happen. I'm not saying you are going to intentionally try to have some sort of skewed power dynamic, but that's what you're describing. You have to be very careful about this (and I would say don't do it at all), because you are older, you are in a position of authority over undergraduates, and it's possible that your goals in this relationship would be very damaging to the trust and open communication you should have in a relationship. As well, your assumption that someone who isn't familiar with the "male body" and has some kind of "otherworldly fascination" with all things new and sexual is wrong as well. Many guys I've spoken to have some form of insecurity or jealousy when it comes to sex. Some even go so far as to not date women that have had sex with other people, even after they themselves are not virgins (I guess this is what you're saying?). Now this is completely hypocritical, I hope you realize. It's also not necessary that someone have no experience for them to be attracted to you, to have some kind of childlike wonder (a really creepy term to use in this discussion), or to feel some exciting crush with butterflies in your stomach and all that. I feel that about my boyfriend of 2.5 years, and it's nowhere near the first relationship I've had. "Interestingly, quite a few girls that have been interested in me have been like 180 degrees from that, like having almost exaggeratedly grown-up-womanish features. Grad school for some weird and inexplicable reason seems to attract these sorts of women too--except for the Asians. I know this is extreme stereotyping but it's something I notice, especially when I compare them to the undergrads at the same university. I also fear that the type I mentioned in the beginning--the ones who find the idea of having a boyfriend almost "mythical", are likely to be hideous and/or have really ugly personalities. In one way it kind of makes sense--why would I be the first guy to like a girl--though on the other hand my lack of dating has had to do with introversion and illness--two things that have nothing to do with my attractiveness per se. A female counterpart of me might have just been late to "get the memo" that people around her had started dating." 1. I can't believe people in grad school (who are generally older) look older than people in undergrad (who are generally younger). It's not extreme stereotyping (except the Asian part), it's just how aging changes your face. 2. This theory you have about finding relationships "mythical" and being "hideous and/or really ugly in their personality" is absolutely wrong. There are many people who are very attractive (in looks and personality, if this is the only requirement) who have not had relationships before. You don't know what experiences they have had, and again you're falling prey to this fallacy that you're so special and no one else has experienced this before. You touch on this point, but you don't seem to recognize that it's completely wrong. As well, people can be unattractive to YOU, while being attractive to others. You can also have a relationship, even if you are unattractive. Your constant talk about women's looks, their inexperience, and how special you want to be to them just reeks of unstable and insecure masculinity. "I think I kind of had four things that I listed as important in a partner: 1) Someone who is new to relationships, like myself, and wants a more childlike and playful relationship 2) Someone who is introverted and intellectual, but not a rival/in the same field 3) Someone I find physically and emotionally (in terms of "raw" mannerisms and the like) attractive to me 4) Someone who fits, logistically and practically speaking, into my life." 1. For you two to be compatible, you need not have the same level of experience. If it's a good relationship, it's childlike and playful (if that's what the two people want). You mentioned not wanting to be so professional and serious in your relationship. Well I'm here to tell you that it's possible - relationships are not like going to an academic talk. They're fun, you can laugh and play and run around and go on the swings and act like kids and no one should judge you. Even if you're in a relationship with someone who has been in a relationship before. My most childlike and playful relationship is my current one, technically eight years after my first (middle-school type) relationship and four years after my more serious first relationship. 2. Your concern about the person being a rival shows me that you are still a bit confused about how relationships work. Or you're very insecure about competing with people. Either way, this needs to be dealt with before you get into any kind of relationship. If not, this will all be raising some serious red flags for the people you're dating. If it doesn't raise serious red flags for them, I would be surprised. 3. This is very important. However, you can not limit yourself, and don't think your level of attraction to the person when you first meet will be related to how attracted you are to them later on. Things really change as a relationship develops, and for me the best relationships where my attraction got stronger were never the ones in which I was most attracted to the person at the beginning. Because then you can only go down from there! 4. I agree with this. This is absolutely important as well. I strongly believe that most undergraduates would not meet this. So generally, please, please don't start dating until you've dealt with these personal issues and these dangerous misconceptions about women, relationships, and compatibility. All I see coming out of this if you start dating without facing and eliminating these issues is a dangerously power imbalanced relationship where you unknowingly end up taking advantage of the other person, all the while trying to stay special/important to them. And that will not be good.
  4. The school likely will not change their policy on airfare from one year to the next, and you don't know what kind of competition there will be next year. If that's the reason to wait, it's not a good reason. If you don't want to go to this school, then don't accept it. It doesn't sound like things are really pushing you towards saying yes here.
  5. To build on this comment, U of T specifically is less likely (compared to other Canadian universities) to give you any more money when you win an award. It's good to win it, but I know people at U of T whose awards just replaced their previous sources of money, meaning there was no increased stipend for them. I believe when the scholarship is higher than your stipend, they wouldn't take that extra money away, but in the case of OGS, this would apply. Meanwhile, at my current school, I got a $10k bump when receiving OGS.
  6. Hi! I applied in Canada (and the US), but not to clinical. The admissions committees get concerned if you only want to work with one person, because if that person moves/retires/something happens to them, they believe you wouldn't/can't work with anyone else. I chose a few different people around a common theme (and sometimes they weren't so close) and I had a lot of success. Clinical might be different, but the issue of what you would do if your PI moved or left is always a concern.
  7. I second this. My advisor kicks up a lot of dirt publishing methods papers and bringing up issues not everyone wants to talk about. I respect her for that and I would choose to work with her again for her focus on methodological issues and doing research properly. There's a real shift in the way people are thinking about science and doing science, and there are people who are not adapting to these new requirements. Is it politics to call them out on it? Reputation in academia is one of those things everyone likes to talk about, but no one can really defend when it comes down to it. It's a very vague notion built on the assumption that people have to like you to cite your work, or if everyone likes everyone else that we will all be more successful. But that's not true IMO.
  8. Hi! I personally think U of T is awesome. Unfortunately I just left there, but I do miss Toronto. Schools (if you mean for children) are quite good, but they vary by area. Some people spend a lot of time and a lot of money trying to live in an area with a "good" school. However, everywhere is safe compared to basically any city in the US, and I wouldn't worry about any aspect of the school other than the schools in lower-income areas are less funded (as is the case in most areas). Family life in Toronto is fine. I would disagree with the assertion that people smoke right in your face (I mean the smoke goes everywhere, but on the whole people don't smoke that much, mostly outside of hospitals and bank buildings). As well, Toronto is clean compared to all major cities in the US. So it's not a dirty, smoky, kid-unfriendly place. Many faculty live in the Annex area (just west of the university), Leaside (as was mentioned), the Danforth, Little Italy, Rosedale, and other areas just outside of the downtown. There are many libraries, tons of campus but lots more in each neighbourhood, including a large, beautiful reference library. There are also lots of large parks, the largest one being High Park, there are three interconnected islands a 20-min ferry ride from downtown that have trails and beaches (it's all car-free), and there are biking and hiking trails in the city, many along rivers where you can canoe and stuff like that. There are some beaches, outdoor pools, skating rinks, and events for kids and adults. I'm sure you would like it, though you might not like all the people complaining about it or the traffic. If you don't have to have a car/drive anywhere, try not to. It makes your life so much less stressful. Hope this helps!
  9. Hi! I'm from the school you want to apply to, and I can tell you that for this school specifically, they actually prefer people from the US over people from Canada. At every other school, this is not the case, but if you went to a top-ranked school in the US, then you are extremely desirable at this school. The granting agency that would cover you here in Canada would be SSHRC, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. If you were doing health-related research, it would be CIHR, the Canadian Institute for Health Research. There is a lot of overlap between Canada and the US, especially with regards to the journals people publish in, the conferences they go to, and the structure of the education system. People go back and forth often, and this school especially is closer to the top schools in the US than it is to any of the other schools in Canada. To give you an example, this school brings in as much research funding as every other school in its province (and it's the province with the most people/universities). Good luck with your application!
  10. Hi! I think it depends on what you want to do later, how much of a focus on research vs applied work you want, whether you want it to be funded or unfunded, and whether the alumni at that school work in positions you would want after graduating. This requires looking at more of the school's websites/program information. But I would say any place that has a good I/O PhD program would have a good Masters program. Good luck!
  11. Hi! I also just applied to I/O psychology masters programs (along with business PhD programs) this past year. Both of the I/O programs were in places that forced me to relocate, but not too far from where I currently live. However, the locations are not as good as where I currently live in terms of size, closeness to industry and companies I may want to work for, and the amount of things going on. I live in a big city, and I would be moving to a smaller city/small-town feel type of place. So I didn't particularly like that aspect when I accepted the program that I am ultimately going to in a few weeks. I understand where you are coming from, and I wouldn't say that it's necessarily an easy decision. Especially for you, compared to me, it must be difficult to leave your job and the things you have gotten used to, and to try something new. I am coming from an undergrad program, so I didn't have much money to do things with and my friends are also all moving around to work/go to school. Just like you, the school I am going to does not have the same prestige that a lot of other schools I applied to have, or even the school that I am coming from. However, with I/O psych the departments are almost never located in a school with much prestige. I'm sure the school you accepted is well known within the I/O community, but it is possible that people haven't heard of it or don't think highly of it outside of that group. And that's okay, as long as it's okay with you. Is there any part of it you're looking forward to? It sounds like you are concerned about moving, about the prestige of the school, and about the area. What about the classes? The professors? The research opportunities? The chance to expand your career or move to a different area? If you don't have positive answers to most of these questions, then it sounds like it is negative all around for you, and you likely wouldn't thrive there if it isn't a good fit. If there really isn't anything that seems positive for you, I would advise not to go because it might be frowned upon. It's a big commitment, and you should want to go for some reasons at least. Though the school isn't as prestigious and the area is not great, I'm very happy to go to a new place, try it out, conduct research, work with a really nice and interesting supervisor, and explore a new field that I've actually never worked in before. So personally, the good outweighs the potential bad. I hope for you that is the case, and if not, you shouldn't attend out of some sense of responsibility. It's best to let people know if you don't want to attend as soon as possible, and then you can visit schools to get an idea of what you want in a program for next time. Best of luck!
  12. The definition of scientist here is something that others would probably disagree with you on. There's scientist as the job you have, and then there is scientist as the type of work you do. Would you say person B/C is not a scientist? Their position might not say scientist, but they are part of the scientific process. As also mentioned above, there might be multiple reasons why the person A can not do the analysis/other steps. It is best to specialize because then each person can get really good at something, so in that case they could not do person Bs or Cs work. But perhaps their skills are outdated, someone else is better at those techniques, or they don't have the ideal background for this work. I would agree with your basic premise that it's not good not to know what your collaborators are doing, especially if you are in charge (like PI or first author). I also agree that people who are not aware of what is going on with the work/collaboration are more susceptible to errors or falsification for multiple reasons.
  13. Hi! If two bad marks are all that you think is keeping you from the schools you want, don't worry. It does matter what you consider top tier, and who you are specifically interested in working with. These things take time to figure out though, which is okay. I would not worry about grades, as you are obviously doing much better now. And you have at least another year to improve your GPA. I would focus on your research, read lots of papers, find out what questions/topics you find interesting based on your research and by reading papers, and then look for people doing that kind of work. The earlier you start prepping for the GRE the better, including just making a word list to learn all the random obscure words that no one knows. Also, remember that the best graduate program is the one that you have the best fit in, where they want you (and they are willing to pay you) and you want to work with them. That doesn't always mean the highest ranked school. It's very different than undergrad, and "better" schools might actually be a worse fit for you, where you could end up less productive and with fewer opportunities, despite going to a more highly ranked school. Good luck!
  14. I might not be totally accurate here, as I've only gone through the application process (for I/O and OB) and am starting grad school this fall. From what I understand, I/O has two sides, where industrial focuses on things like assessment and hiring, and organizational focuses on things like motivation, commitment, and team processes. OB, from my experience, focuses on things a bit broader and less at the individual level the way I/O psych does, like stigma, leadership (in a broader sense), emotional intelligence in organizations, and things like that. So the short answer is that I/O is more 'individual' than OB. However, people still move to business schools and study OB when they were from I/O psych programs in their PhDs. If you're interested in grad school, it's best to look into the specific people you want to work with. There can be lots of overlap, and I find the largest differences to be in the program and the aspects outside of research topics. For example, the types of data gathering (qualitative vs quantitative) can be different, the types of degrees commonly offered can be different (there are more direct PhD programs in OB, and more tiered programs with Masters and PhDs separately in I/O), and the number of people going into industry/academia (and therefore the focus/interest of the students that make up the program) can be different. About half of people in I/O are interested in going into industry, which seemed to be to be a kind of taboo thing that no one does in OB/business PhD programs of any kind. I hope this helps! I just applied to OB and I/O programs in Canada, so you can PM if you'd like and I can give you more info.
  15. I second everything that Jullietmercredi said. You can still have independence, good job prospects, research opportunities, and fun exciting stuff in Toronto. And with all the money you're saving, you could even go to NYC, do fun stuff, and make connections there all for less than going to Columbia.
  16. Hey! I'm entering an I/O psych program this year, and I'm from toronto as well (but the other university haha) PM me if you want and I can give you all the details. The short answer is your application seems really good (I graduated with the exact same gpa, 3.76) and you shouldn't worry if your research experience is in another area, as long as you show that you have research skills. So for that reason, I would focus more on the research, because some places are extremely research focused, while other places are more balanced. I can also give you some pointers on the GRE! : )
  17. I'm taking statistics and a course with my supervisor. The second one should be fun, because we get along really well, but I still worry sometimes about how the dynamic will play out. I'm moving into a new subfield, so there's tons to learn! I want to take ALL the classes, but I know there's other things to focus on too.
  18. My bf is starting a neuroscience program as well, and from my time with him I've learned how he doesn't always feel comfortable or like he belongs in the same situations that I might take for granted. Being the first person to graduate from university in your family, having to translate for your parents, or teach them basic financial skills, or sometimes loan them money is all new to me. However, both my bf (from a lower income background) and I (from a more educated and better off background) can not relate to people who have no sense of what things cost, no responsibility and no previous work experience, and who are still dependent on their parents in graduate school. I know many people like this, but both of us are unable to really relate to them on a deeper level or get along very well. So although I know there are many things I likely can't relate to, I completely relate to being someone more frugal, who prefers to window shop, and doesn't feel comfortable with people who spend their parents' money like it's nothing. That might not help you find a way to get along with these people, but you might just have to be polite acquaintances and not close friends.
  19. I would say that a PhD is not worth it if it is not funded, especially in Engineering where it is common to be funded. However, you should see if your work so far can grant you a masters, or help you to fulfill those requirements. I think it all depends on how long you likely have in this program, and whether the Masters would be funded. If it isn't and you have one or two years left of the PhD, that would make things pretty similar (I could be wrong). On a (kind of) unrelated note, my father studied the EXACT same things a long time ago. Is your goal to be a prof? To work in industry? To do chip design? Because from what I've seen, there are not a lot of these jobs in North America, as things move to other countries. I would look into exactly what you want to do, and make sure that there are jobs available when you get out. My dad had a LOT of difficulty finding new positions, even after starting two chip design companies. There's a lot more software now, and people aren't investing in early-stage hardware companies as much. Good luck!
  20. I'm doing an internship, finishing up some papers and studies in my undergrad lab, and writing a review paper for a professor. On top of publishing an undergraduate journal and looking for apartments in my new city, it's been a hectic and stressful (but really fun and productive) summer. I'm going away for six days to NYC and Boston next month, but no other trips. Also, I was supposed to read a bunch of papers and get a head start on my program, but I have not been able to find the time. Months ago, that was my top priority.
  21. Hi! I was waitlisted at a different program at U of T (Rotman's PhD), but I have some friends that applied to science graduate programs. Generally, people will look at your transcript, see that you switched programs, and if that explains you low grades before and high grades after, then that is a good thing. Many programs take your last two years into account. It's important to explain this in your statement of purpose, and you can frame it in a positive way by saying that you found what you really excel at, and that changed your university performance. Of course, it depends how low you're talking about, what your cumulative GPA is, and what the rest of your application is like. Setting yourself apart with research, publications, relevant extracurriculars, and strong GREs is important. Finding a good fit with a supervisor is important. Do as much as you can with these other aspects, because GPA is just one part of the application. Best of luck!
  22. Good idea! They do seem to be very vague with you. They are probably dealing with a lot and trying to find qualified applicants, so that's a good sign!
  23. This process seems different than the one I went through, so it may change between schools. For example, I was never notified that I was nominated by my department. When was your application deadline? Do you know when they would get back to you with responses? These things also vary from school to school, but it help us see where the department/school is in the process by knowing their deadlines. For example, this document details the procedure for my program. There are two levels, the graduate program and the faculty level. I would say the graduate program recommending you is the first step, and it might not be guaranteed that you receive OGS if you pass this step. However, it's very likely (if not for sure) that you are on the shortlist, which means you could be waitlisted or you could be offered OGS right away. The link to the document is here: https://grad.uwo.ca/doc/financial_support/scholarships/ogs_operations/2016/Social Science.pdf Does this make sense? The bottom line is that it differs between schools, and I think being nominated is not enough to receive the award for sure, but it definitely helps.
  24. Along with what @TakeruK said, getting previous awards helps you get future awards, in general. I never got USRAs in undergrad, because there were so few and your GPA had to be insanely amazing to get them. Also, my school didn't care about experience, and it may have worked against me in the higher years (because they try to use the USRAs to get people involved in research who aren't already). Although I never received any major awards in undergrad, I got OGS when entering my first year of my Masters, so obviously you don't need the USRA in all cases. However, different schools have different applicant pools, and you may be going somewhere more/less competitive, and the applicant pool will be different. In most cases, there are also many more OGS/SSHRC/CIHR awards available than there were USRAs. As you mentioned, the basic underlying qualities are common to receiving both awards. For this reason, you shouldn't worry about the USRA. Good luck!
  25. I don't think anyone hates younger people asking questions, first of all. That would be pretty mean, as the goal of the forum is to help others. Also, as a woman who is always apologising for things, stop doing it! Really. It'll help you. Onto your actual questions. First of all, most people here don't have 3.9s. I see people say this all the time, and it's just not true. I'm starting to think those are the people you remember, because it causes you anxiety to see those really high grades, but it's not reality. Second of all, you can still do well. For most people, first year is where their worst marks are. Which means you're doing fine and you're probably like a lot of other people you see on this site. Upper year courses matter a lot more, so I know it seems like you're doing badly now, but you're honestly fine. If you enjoy it, things will get better. The people who do really well at the beginning are usually those people much better at tests, but they likely aren't the ones that are passionate and willing to keep sticking it out when things get challenging (but fun!). You don't need stellar first year marks to get research experience. Talk to your TAs, email professors, go to their office hours, or ask other people you know how they got into research. Can you afford to volunteer for a while? It can be hard to get paid doing research as an undergrad, but there are usually volunteer spots available. I think you should speak to someone about your anxiety and mental health issues. Talking to someone can help you with your test performance as well. Its great youre thinking about these things so early. Good luck!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use