• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Levon3

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Application Season
    Already Attending
  • Program

Recent Profile Visitors

1,333 profile views
  1. 2018 Education Applicants

    Not at your school or field, but my interview visit was a lot of schmoozing, getting to know current doc students, chatting informally with professors, seeing the campus, and then sitting down with my potential advisor and later potential labmates to learn about current projects and talk about research interests. It was a very full day for an introvert. I would make sure to prepare your 1-minute elevator pitch about research interests, and it might be helpful also to have several small-talk topics for all of the times you'll be meeting new people during meals and/or campus tours etc.
  2. cumulative GPA and explanaion

    This might be a question to ask the program director.
  3. NSF Fellowships

    hm. I am still required to work in my advisor's lab, even though I am funded by NSF.
  4. Math Ed PhD funding

  5. IRB between institutions

    Thank you, @fuzzylogician!
  6. IRB between institutions

    What I'm wondering is, how can I convince my IRB office to change the status of my approval from expedited to exempt using the fact that other institution's IRB office deemed it to be so? Has anyone had success with such a predicament?
  7. IRB between institutions

    Right, it's just that this is a virtual event, so getting people to mail back forms is extremely unlikely. Therefore, we'll likely get a whole lot more "yes"s on the survey than forms mailed back, which means if I continue on the project I'll be limiting the number of participants whose data we can collect.
  8. Education PhD without experience as a teacher?

    One thing to consider is that some faculty positions, if you'll be working with pre-service teachers, require at least some K-12 teaching experience.
  9. IRB between institutions

    I'm trying to do a research project in partnership with a researcher at another institution. I submitted my IRB application and got it approved before my collaborator did. Mine is categorized as expedited but he just heard back that his is exempt. So under my IRB, participants must sign consent forms and mail them back, but under the other institution's, all they need to do is check yes on a survey. I called my IRB to try to find out how we can get these to be reconciled, and they basically said they don't care what the other institution does, that's how mine has to be done. It seems that if my collaborator moves ahead with consent via survey checkbox, I'll no longer be able to work on the project (which I designed). Does anyone else have experience partnering with researchers at other institutions? Do you have any advice for me?
  10. NSF GRFP 2017-18

    Yes. They are deliberate about awarding to underrepresented groups. Not sure about this. You can download last years' awards and sort by subfield--it might help you answer this question.
  11. NSF GRFP 2017-18

    I didn't. Didn't want to chance it being against the 1" margin rules.
  12. My hunch is that the latter would be better. If she knows you well, and can write in detail about your work and aptitude, this seems more powerful than a stock letter that they may have read before. How well does the first prof know you? (Also, keep in mind that I am a 2nd year PhD student, so I may not know what I am talking about.)
  13. Math Ed PhD funding

  14. NSF GRFP 2017-18

    If I knew a rec letter-writer was going to include some CV details, I left it out of my statement. Otherwise, I just tried really hard to paint a cohesive picture of how the relevant experiences fit in with the path. Last year I emailed people in my field on the awardee list and asked if they'd be willing to share their statements with me. A few did. Those few were super helpful as examples of how to word it. There are also quite a few examples posted around the internet. But to answer your question, my instinct was to try to mention everything, and it worked for me.
  15. NSF GRFP 2017-18

    I suspect that this varies by field. In my field, it is acceptable to cite it as you would any journal article, but where you would normally print the title of the journal, instead write, "Manuscript in preparation" or "Manuscript under review" (depending on which is true). For example (APA): Harding, M. W. (2017). A receptor for the immuno-suppressant FK 506 is a cis–trans peptidyl-prolyl isomerase. Manuscript in preparation.