mmm35

My plan is to buy generic versions of everything (except maybe shampoo and conditioner), to do netflix instead of cable, to defer my student loan payments, to stop going out to nice dinners, to not buy nice clothes for the next 5 years, and to live in cheap on campus housing with roommates. Also to be too busy to spend lots of money on entertainment.

But the reason I was posting was to comment on eating cheaply. At my undergrad school (and where I'm going for grad school) there are co-ops where a group of people all buy food together and eat together evey night. Usually you have to cook one night a week, but the other people cook the other nights. It is fantastic to have company for dinner every night and to have homecooked meals every night without cooking yourself. My old co-op would even save plates of food for people who couldn't make it to dinner. And most of all it is incredibly cheap to do this. Everything was bought in huuuuge bulk quantities and made from scratch. We literally had garbage cans full of things like flour and suger. I think it cost $400 to eat for a semester (though we only ate meat once a week).

If co-ops aren't your thing, I reccommend Traer Joes for cheap staples, and even cheap frozen foods to heat up. Then again my impression that Trader Joes is dirt cheap may be less true outside of a city where normal grocery stores aren't really expensive.

I feel like this is and odd Catch 22 for women in academia (or really any successful women). We want a guy who is as ambitious and successful as us, but a relationship is very difficult when both partners are following their dreams and not following eachother.

My situation is that my boyfriend got his dream job for next year, and I got into my dream school. By some bizarre luck we will only be an hour apart (though this wasn't a major consideration for either of us in accepting jobs/schools). However, I still wonder what will happen when I do a postdoc and look for a tenure track position in the future. I know he won't follow me, and I know that I won't give up a dream job to be near him. And I don't think I could ever fully respect someone who would follow me around.

I guess what I'm saying is, there is no ideal partner for women in our situation. It is either someone with less ambition who will follow you or someone with as much ambition as you who will always be travelling on a separate path. My plan is to keep going and hope for more luck along the way (and to be willing to make small concessions myself). It is almost impossible to know what to expect in the next 10 years, so why worry about it too much? If he wants to follow you then that is his decision to make, not yours. Of course if you are starting to get over him (which sounds like it may be the case) then he has a right to know.

Hi all,

I'm currently a first-year MA student in Islamic Studies, and will be applying next year to Ph.D. work to several top programs -- Chicago and Yale in Political Science, Duke, Princeton and Harvard in Near Eastern Studies/Religion, and Michigan in History/Anthropology. I've got a strong undergraduate record (4.0 GPA and multiple majors), decent GRE scores (660V, 730Q, 6 writing), and a pretty strong publishing record this early in the game -- several articles, several conference papers, and I'm working on my first book as we speak. The thing is, in my first year as an MA student this past year, I took a bit of a ding, getting two A minuses (on account of taking on waaay too much this year).

I know graduate GPA is expected to be higher than undergrad, so I'm wondering, is an A minus here as an MA student a deal-breaker for top Ph.D. programs? I imagine it varies across the spectrum of programs, so if anyone can comment intelligently about any of these programs all the better -- especially Michigan, as I don't specifically have an anthro background, so that one is going to be a little trickier. Will a less-than-perfect (but still strong) MA record stand in the way of admission to these top programs?

If this does stand to pose a problem, might it be worth retaking the GRE? My scores were above 90th percentile across all registers, but I know the verbal can stand to be improved. Might that be necessary in this case?

I practically had a panic attack after getting my *second* A-minus (I was borderline by half of a point, and my prof refused to budge). I just took on waaay too much this year, otherwise I don't think this would have happened. I'd really appreciate any feedback anyone can provide, as it'd go a long way to alleviate my angst. Thanks!

Thanks for the feedback! Agreed, I'm totally done over-exerting myself, as this year taught me. No one at school bothered to mention that taking 14 graduate credits in a single semester (when the standard is 9), alongside this book project, is suicide. I'll be done with my book at the end of the summer, and in my second year I can focus and take the standard course load, shoot to write a solid MA thesis, and all will be well. Still, I can't undo these two A minuses.

With Chicago, I'm reticent to do NELC because it's very pre-modern. I'm more interested in the modern period, hence my interests being more in the social sciences. I just want a grounding in pre-modern thought, but I certainly don't want to write my dissertation on that period. With Michigan, I'm not applying to anthro, but to the joint history/anthro program, and since my work in my current MA is almost entirely pre-modern history, I'll have that end covered. As for the anthro end, one of my undergrad majors was sociology (I wrote my honors thesis in sociology), think that might stand to cover me better?

Yep, I'm working on statements as we speak, and I know I will have very solid recommendation letters. My key faculty all know how much I've taken on this year, and are outright amazed that I'm writing my book in the same year I'm undertaking MA work. So, my thought is that if they mention as much in their letters, perhaps it will mitigate the record a bit? Or is that wishful thinking?

I'll post up on the interdisciplinary forum as you said. Hopefully some folks will have some ideas there. Thanks so much!

By the time you get to the PhD level, grades are not the most important thing anymore, not by a long shot. Actually, it can be frowned upon, for reasons such as your "panic attack" after getting an A-. The programs generally don't give a crap about your grades as long as you don't get put on academic probation. They want you to be focused on research, and if you are the type of student who is freaking out about an A-, then you may wind up taking time away from your research to strive for A's, and honestly, programs do NOT want that. Probably the type of lesson your prof who wouldn't budge on the half a point from a A was trying to give you.

I think the grade-obsession is a very immature approach to grade school.You say your grades dropped this year because you took too much on, but do you expect less from grad school? If you are looking for a funded PhD, not only will you have the full load of classes, but you will probably be TA-ing and doing research too. The average work week in grad school is 6 days a week, and anywhere from 50-70 hours depending on the advisor.

And as you can tell from the reputation value this post has given you (in case you don't know what it is, the red number at the bottom right hand corner of your post), I think you REALLY need an adjustment in your priorities. This post came off as a narcissist who is being insecure and seeking validation from everyone that you are still wonderful. I am sure you are a great student and you didn't mean it that way, but still, that is how you are coming off to your peers, and could in the future to professors and other grad students. You need to build networking and relationships in your field, and honestly no one is going to want to listen to stuff like this.

So pretty much the overall message of my post is chill out! Get over the grade-obsession, because it's not going to get you anywhere in life. Re-taking the GRE's is not going to help you any more if you are already in 90th percentiles, A-'s are not going to kill you. The best thing you can do for yourself is chill out, and focus more on research in your MA, get more publications, and really make sure your recommendations and SOP are awesome. I am sure you will get in, just think you need to see the big picture more instead of obsessing on a 4.0.

To put it in perspective, in my undergrad I had a 3.65 GPA, 75-80th percentile GRE's, and I got into and am attending the #9 ranked program in my field, and an Ivy. What got me in was my 3+ years of academic and industrial experience, and stellar recommendations. So RELAX!

I seriously considered going to the same school for all three, but ultimately decided not to. One major reason was that I had allready run out of courses to take by the time I finished my M Eng. More importantly though is that I wanted a new perspective on things and to get a chance to learn from a new group of people. The further I got into the process, the more I realized that what I wanted to study would be better to study at a different school. I dont think that "academic incest" is nearly as frowned upon now as it was in the past, but the reasons that it was frowned upon still exist; it is always good to broaden your horizons and avoid getting pigeonholed into your undergrad advisors interests.

Can you apply to PhD programs and see if you get better funding offers before deciding to do the MS or PhD at your current school?

Overall though, going to a different school may be best for you personally, but I really doubt it would make a difference in getting a govt job. I know that in industry people could care less if you have a masters or not, and I doubt anyone who hired me could tell you where mine is from. But it is always possible to change your mind and want to remain in academia.

Funny, I guess some graduate students have the ultimate sense of entitlement. Not that we should give our talents away for free, but you'd never see anyone else in any walk of life making such an audacious claim.

I also think the OP took it quite well. Having spent a few years reading up online relationship forums, I have noticed that folks who wrote about their issues tend to be at the highest stress and frustration level. There are dramatisations, exaggerations, and outcries at trivialities when in many occasions those conflicts can be solved over an open, honest and calm talk with their partners (the exception being the cases of abuse, of course). However, for us readers, all information available is whatever is written by the OP who could have been in a particularly bad mood, and thegradcafe crowds are exceptional at analysing and critiquing the written information (as we should be!).

I think all the advices given here are respectful in its own rights, as we have a limitation as a commentator without fully knowing the OP and her boyfriend, and the details of their relationship. The OP probably has got all the possible advices given the suggested issues. However, I feel that up to certain degree the issues of the OP echo with what many academic women fear regarding finding and having a successful relationship (or we could call it the whole heart vs. brain matter as the early generation of University women did?).

My ex was an intellectual man with attractive qualities (handsome, romantic, musically talented, metrosexual, cooking skills, etc) who somehow set a norm of discussing philosophers over dinner. After he broke up with me, after spending 2 years in recovery (and analysing what went wrong, and learning lessons over what to put up with and not to/seeing through immature vs. mature habits of a person), I went out to date for the first time and things were dramatically different outside the academic setting. To make it worse, I moved to Los Angeles after the breakup, and it is safe to say that the majority of the population do not read in this town, let alone critical readings.

My attempts at finding a learned man was hard enough, and then I had to filter the egotistical ones, the self-absorbed ones, the hypocritical ones, and mostly the incompatible ones. It is a small pool to begin with, and during the process, oh gosh, how many times I thought maybe I did something wrong, I am being unrealistic, and men in my age group find me unattractive because of my academic background, etc etc?!?! And then, of course one's mind wanders to think about societal prejudices and gender expectations over the inner workings of the relationship, and sometimes gets frustrated by unfathomably conservative folks with their notions of what women's status should be in relation to men's, and insecure people who can't accept what is outside their comfort zone, etc etc...and eventually to a point where a chain of self-questioning begins (aka. "am I a scholarly mind good enough to deserve another scholarly minded one??! I mean, everybody tells me I should give up and keep them to myself and settle with a decent man.").

In the end, I didn't settle. But I did change in some sense. My current boyfriend is not a trained academic. He is a filmmaker with a BFA and does not read (he claims that he doesn't have time to read), but has other important qualities (emotionally capable and communicative, artistic, reasonable with finances, career ambitious and has an healthy and mature attitude towards gender/minority). As a feminist, I guess it was a foremost importance to find a man whose belief system is similar, who is comfortable with himself and is open to the idea of multiplicity in what an individual can be. Yet I was uncertain about his being less knowledgeable in the academic literature, and couldn't ignore my longing for a joy of discussing academic subjects. However at the same time, I realised that since he listens well and is a person of wits and intelligence, why can't I explaining concepts to him in a more ordinary language? (after all, my research interest aligns with education...and one shall be true to herself in a life style as the Greeks believed...right?)

Kinda went sideways, but wanted to mention the other side of the spectrum where the significant other is not even in the academia. It really is all about having a balance, and what one may consider an essential may be not so and subject to change in a long run. At least my postmodern theorists say so! (tee hee hee) And cheers to all graduate students and their relationships

A last word to the OP: you didn't mention about the duration of your relationship or anything except you guys are in a long distance relationship. In case if you guys never had a long period of physically close (distance-wise) relationship, this may be a good chance to see what is actually working and not working. Seeing and interacting with the beloved one in person actually affect the dynamics of the relationship profoundly as things can be highly abstracted in the cases of LDR/online relationship.

I feel like this is and odd Catch 22 for women in academia (or really any successful women). We want a guy who is as ambitious and successful as us, but a relationship is very difficult when both partners are following their dreams and not following eachother.

My situation is that my boyfriend got his dream job for next year, and I got into my dream school. By some bizarre luck we will only be an hour apart (though this wasn't a major consideration for either of us in accepting jobs/schools). However, I still wonder what will happen when I do a postdoc and look for a tenure track position in the future. I know he won't follow me, and I know that I won't give up a dream job to be near him. And I don't think I could ever fully respect someone who would follow me around.

I guess what I'm saying is, there is no ideal partner for women in our situation. It is either someone with less ambition who will follow you or someone with as much ambition as you who will always be travelling on a separate path. My plan is to keep going and hope for more luck along the way (and to be willing to make small concessions myself). It is almost impossible to know what to expect in the next 10 years, so why worry about it too much? If he wants to follow you then that is his decision to make, not yours. Of course if you are starting to get over him (which sounds like it may be the case) then he has a right to know.

Also, make sure that you enjoy college and do what you really want to do. I think it is rare to have decided to go to grad school all ready when in high school, and it is incredibly likely that you will change your life plans in the next few years. I don't think schools will care at all if you came from a community college. But they will care if you really truly want to be there, try not to get too far ahead of yourself and just enjoy the ride. If you are meant to be in a PhD program, it will show and you will eventually find your way there.

A backpack. And if anyone has a problem with it I will say that I am an engineer and therefore allowed to wear a sweatshirt, jeans, a pony-tail, glasses, and a backpack every day and do it unapologetically. I can look good on weekends, and I'm too old to care about impressing people with my looks on normal days. (during my masters program people that I lived with wouldn't recognize me out on weekends when I wore makeup/real clothes because my boyfriend was in town, haha)

Yes, people most definitely will (or did) wait until April 15th on Ph.D. programs, and it is perfectly reasonable to do so. Few programs require as much of an investment academically and personally as PhD programs. To "rush" into a decision could have devastating consequences. Furthermore, some are accepted at one institution and wait-listed at another. By waiting until April 15, they are maximizing the possibility that the wait-list will come through and they can decline their backup. To be honest. I'm a little frustrated when those on wait lists expect those who have been accepted to decide "early." I have many choice words that I could say, but that would probably be inappropriate. If someone did well enough to be accepted, they should have every chance they can to be sure it's the right decision. It is extremely selfish to "expect" them to decide any sooner. And FWIW, I say this as someone who was accepted to my first choice off the wait list. Not for one second did I begrudge those ahead of me the time they were given to decide.

I feel like this is and odd Catch 22 for women in academia (or really any successful women). We want a guy who is as ambitious and successful as us, but a relationship is very difficult when both partners are following their dreams and not following eachother.

My situation is that my boyfriend got his dream job for next year, and I got into my dream school. By some bizarre luck we will only be an hour apart (though this wasn't a major consideration for either of us in accepting jobs/schools). However, I still wonder what will happen when I do a postdoc and look for a tenure track position in the future. I know he won't follow me, and I know that I won't give up a dream job to be near him. And I don't think I could ever fully respect someone who would follow me around.

I guess what I'm saying is, there is no ideal partner for women in our situation. It is either someone with less ambition who will follow you or someone with as much ambition as you who will always be travelling on a separate path. My plan is to keep going and hope for more luck along the way (and to be willing to make small concessions myself). It is almost impossible to know what to expect in the next 10 years, so why worry about it too much? If he wants to follow you then that is his decision to make, not yours. Of course if you are starting to get over him (which sounds like it may be the case) then he has a right to know.

Wow. I originally thought that this post was about finding a decent boyfriend/SO from simply reading the title. Boy was I wrong. I'm sorry OP, but I really feel sorry for you. You've found a man that is willing to follow you to the ends of the earth and you're upset because he isn't on the same level as you academically. Women have, for decades, been expected to follow men as they pursue their careers and you have (from what it seems) a genuinely great man on your hands that you're ready to throw away because he's willing to do the same for you. I assume that most women would be happy to have a man that is willing to take "slave wages" and live with family just to be with the woman they love.

It seems, as so many other posters have stated, that you are looking for a way out. We've given you that, just not in the way you expected. We are telling you to break up with him, but more because you don't seem to even like him than because he's not on the same "trajectory."

Good luck in the future. I hope you do eventually realize that money and success and degrees can only keep you so warm at night. I personally like sharing my bed with my SO - he's perpetually at 99 degrees and he keeps my toes nice and toasty.

I am in a similar situation now with my girlfriend (I'm a male). I'm guessing here, but it sounds like your just not that into him, and maybe more into yourself? I say this because I am sort of the same way. I want a mate who is successful, has a degree, ect., but not one who has "more" of that than me. I would resent a girlfriend/wife who did not eventually get a masters, or even a phd. I think this just comes down to age and maturity, but I'm sure some people never really grow out of that. I'm confident I will! Don't drag the guy along if you really don't see yourself with him, whether that be because of your own selfishness or his own issues. I'm sure it will work out just fine, good luck!

I feel like this is and odd Catch 22 for women in academia (or really any successful women). We want a guy who is as ambitious and successful as us, but a relationship is very difficult when both partners are following their dreams and not following eachother.

My situation is that my boyfriend got his dream job for next year, and I got into my dream school. By some bizarre luck we will only be an hour apart (though this wasn't a major consideration for either of us in accepting jobs/schools). However, I still wonder what will happen when I do a postdoc and look for a tenure track position in the future. I know he won't follow me, and I know that I won't give up a dream job to be near him. And I don't think I could ever fully respect someone who would follow me around.

I guess what I'm saying is, there is no ideal partner for women in our situation. It is either someone with less ambition who will follow you or someone with as much ambition as you who will always be travelling on a separate path. My plan is to keep going and hope for more luck along the way (and to be willing to make small concessions myself). It is almost impossible to know what to expect in the next 10 years, so why worry about it too much? If he wants to follow you then that is his decision to make, not yours. Of course if you are starting to get over him (which sounds like it may be the case) then he has a right to know.

1) the ranking systems are pretty much meaningless. when you talk to any professor about school X's program, they know it only by the current faculty there and those individuals' reputations, not as being "top 10" or "top 20" or "outside the top 50." the only people that pay attention to the rankings are grad students and people trying to get the alumni to donate.

2) everyone mentions 3 or 4 professors at each program in their SOPs. everyone tailors their SOP to fit specifically with whatever school they're applying to. everyone writes sincere applications. so, to that extent, nothing you did in your applications to these top 50/60 schools is unique. all the applications they received, or almost all of them, were carefully considered, thoughtfully written, and tailored to the department and the faculty within it.

3) you were rejected by those schools because they didn't have space for you, your potential advisors weren't taking on new graduate students, a different professor won the battle over whose potential advisee got "the last spot," they couldn't find funding for you, or they just didn't think your work was that interesting. you may have seen more of a "fit" in your application than they did. you might have bored them. just because "school #17" validated your potential as an academic doesn't mean schools 18-100 have to do the same.

don't over-analyze it. just be happy that you have a few acceptances to choose from.

Could not agree more. Wow. Just, wow.

So I'm a freshman at a top-10 undergraduate school, and this semester, I'm taking Real Analysis, Physics E&M, Organic Chemistry, and two humanities classes, but so far, I'm getting like B's in all my classes. If I want to go to grad school in like theoretical computer science, how much does this hurt? Do I still have a chance to get into a PhD program? Like, my overall GPA would be really low, but none of my classes really have anything to do with Computer Science, unless Real Analysis counts. And also, all my grades first semester were pass/fail, so they won't affect my GPA at all. Also, I'm doing an REU over the summer, and I'm a grader for a couple of math classes now if those mean anything.

And sorry if this seems ridiculous, but I don't know anything about applying to grad school. I just looked at Berkeley's website, and they said that they recommend a 3.7, which is kind of worrying me, since I'm so far from that.

People have definitely tried to do that. Look at the Bee Gees, for example, and there are actually a few other artists. And sometimes people might even say you're pretty fly (for a white guy).

Personally, I'd say the original question was posed by someone suffering from the overly-ambitious-type-who-doesn't-know-how-to-enjoy-life syndrome.

I think the point was that this thread's original issue is small potatoes compared to people who have had to grapple with much tougher life situations.

Ethnicity-related comments aside (and I read the 'white' comment as a synonym for 'privilege,' rather than leaping to defensiveness), she does have a point; it'd be nice if questioning an optimistic partner was the biggest issue I had to face.

I don't think that using a racial identifier is the problem here. what is really the problem is the petty, self-absorbed, and soul-less tone of the original post. i guess the other poster could have used the term "priviledged people's problems" rather than "white people's problems" but either way the basic idea is the same and is right on point, in my opinion.

Really? Does that mean that I can be a "black person" without being black? Because I've really always wanted to become the singer from the 5th Dimension but my pastiness and lack of soul is hindering my progress a bit.

I can't believe this is even a topic. Seriously?