fuzzylogician

There shouldn't be any problem. First, it's unlikely that you'll be asked where else you applied. Second, if you are asked (this is true for anything you might asked) don't panic and just answer truthfully. You applied to X, Y and Z schools because they have good programs in your area of study, and no one knows how well they will do before the apply so you were maximizing your chances of getting admitted somewhere with good funding. I assume the answer for why you applied to the Canadian school is the same as why you applied to the other US schools: because they were a good research fit. That's pretty much all anyone would expect you to say and it's a perfectly reasonable answer. Good luck with your interview; I am sure it will be just fine.

It's hard to judge tones in emails but I would be concerned that this professor is trying to gently tell you that he can't write a strong letter for you, and is trying to have you find someone to write a stronger letter, if you have that option. If the main concerns are really his affiliation and research expertise, I think you don't need to worry too much. A strong letter is a strong letter. It'd obviously be better to have a strong letter from someone who the adcom knows and trusts, but this is still an experienced professor who would be able to give an informed opinion of your research abilities, so a good letter from him is not a bad thing to have. But if this is a polite way of saying that it won't be a strong letter or that he doesn't want to do it, then you might as well get a ok letter from someone who is at least better known to the adcoms and has more relevant research and/or affiliation

It's really not a research proposal. You're not going to review previous literature or propose methods and a design for a study. The goal is to talk intelligibly about a research question or subfield that interests you. I think that good SOPs are able to articulate a particular interest with some amount of detail and also convey to the reader why they should care about this question. If you can't formulate a question or set of questions at the moment, you should still be able to define some specific areas or topics that appeal to you and explain why, even if you don't know what's the cutting edge research being done there now. You should still be able to tell us why we should care about whatever it is you want to study and what's exciting about it (to you). Conveying this kind of information about your research interests will show the adcom that you actually understand what you're getting into and that you have made an informed choice when you decided to apply to their program.

Lots of countries, including in Asia and the EU, have 3-year BA degrees. I've never heard of anyone having trouble applying to grad school because of that. When schools say they want a "4-year degree" they mean to distinguish it from a 2-year Associate Degree you can get from a community college in the US, but any good school would know that in many other countries a BA is 3 years, not 4. You could email or call admissions at particular schools and ask, but this really shouldn't be a problem at all.

No. As you say, an amazingly strong letter from a super-famous professor is obviously great, but it's not the only kind of letter that will get you into grad school. Generally speaking, a letter from a better known professor is better than a letter from someone completely obscure because it's likelier that the adcom members know this person and trust his/her opinion. (This can also backfire is this prof has previously recommended unsuccessful students to that school, but lets assume that doesn't happen that often.) This is the same logic as the fact that coming from a better known school/department helps you more than being from an obscure school/department. That said, the content of the letter is the most important thing. You want letters from people who know you and your work well and can argue on your behalf that you will be a successful student--and future colleague--at the department you are applying to. This entails knowing details of your personality and work and being able to give specific examples to back up claims about you. Getting a vague letter from someone famous won't get you as far as getting a strong detailed letter from someone less famous.

Congrats!

Normally (read: as far as I know, but I suppose this could vary) taxes are withheld from your paycheck automatically, and you don't need to do anything. Your paystub will indicate exactly how much money was deducted. At the end of the year, you do your taxes and find out if you paid more or less than you had to, and adjust accordingly. There is software that your school should make available to you so you can do your federal taxes as an international student. There are also state taxes (and city taxes, in NYC) but they are usually a lot less than federal taxes, and they were also automatically deducted from my paycheck. If at your university, taxes are not automatically withheld, I'd ask more advanced international students how this works and also ask someone in your department headquarters and/or the university's payroll department. It's possible that different schools have different arrangements or that this depends on the source of your funding. If your country has a tax treaty with the US, it's possible to fill out a form to ask for an adjustment accordingly, so you don't get as much (or any, depending on the treaty) tax withheld. You get the form from HR or payroll or whoever is in charge of paychecks at your university. You don't have to fill this form out -- if you don't, taxes will get withheld as if there is no treaty, but then you claim the treaty exemption when you do your taxes, and you can have the money reimbursed.

Seems to me it's a two step process. First, do you want to work on this side project? Personally, I have to have "side" projects, although it's funny to call them that because I don't have just one "main" project. I did for my dissertation, but not before then and not since. I realize it might be different in a lab science so I don't know if this helps you, but I've always thought that this tendency to work on just one project or have multiple of them is tied more to personality than circumstances. For me, it's important to have several things going at the same time; it helps me not to feel stuck and it sort of distributes the risk of anything failing so it's not like I have everything invested in this one project and if something goes wrong with it then I am completely stuck. Besides, I have lots of things I would like to think about and I enjoy having collaborations with other colleagues, all of which require working on multiple projects. On the other hand, I have friends who only work on (possibly many aspects of) one topic. I think it helps them specialize and concentrate their time and efforts, as opposed to juggling many balls in the air. This works for them, and seems like a fine and frequent enough choice that people make, so my conclusion from this is that you can be successful both ways, you just need to learn what your preferences are. Now, suppose you want to work on a side project. Then, the question is whether your main advisor will be ok with it. This is something you have to bring up with him. If he is not ok with it, it seems to me that it would harm your relationship to pursue the side project, so you'd have to drop it. If your advisor agrees, then you need to have an understanding about your responsibilities, priorities, and how you'll split your time between the two projects. I'd suggest having some thoughts about that when you approach your advisor. This is definitely not unheard of, so I'm sure you could find others on the board and in your lab who have a similar kind of arrangement.

Looks like it is not up yet, according to the LSA 2015 FAQ page: "Applications will most likely be available online in early 2015." http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/lsa2015/faqs/ More information is here, in case you haven't found it yet: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/meetings-institutes/institutes/fellowships

I suppose this may depend on the person but I can't imagine doing my dissertation research without the support of my professors and (as importantly!) my colleagues. Writing is a lonely process, and not having the opportunity to commiserate, get advice, or get support from others who know what you are going through, would be very hard. I did some writing in groups, I definitely talked a lot to friends about how we all were doing, and I think getting feedback and advice from my professors was much easier than it would have been had I been away. In your new city, would there be any kind of support system for you? Maybe people at a local university that you could get in touch with? I think that kind of arrangement where you have local people to talk to would help a lot. Otherwise, I think it's possible to be away from your advisors and be successful, but I do think there may be more pitfalls, and it may take you longer to recognize them. I think that setting up ways to stay in touch and get feedback from your advisors, either through occasional visits or through skype meetings is important.

Female Science Professor asked this question in her blog a long time ago, and some of the comments are interesting: http://science-professor.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-importance-of-liking.html

As TMP says, it's possible, especially since it's early in the relationship, that you just haven't fully adjusted to working together yet but things will improve. Some people are socially awkward and it just takes time to get to know each other and become comfortable. However, this is not fun to hear, but we are all people. Both students and advisors. As people, there are other people who we get along with more and others who we get along with less. It's possible that your advisor likes you less or gets along with you less as a person than some of his other advisees, and I don't think there is too much that he can about that. As long as he is doing a good job advising you, he is doing his job. It may not be possible for him to 'like' you more as a person, and that's not required by the job, either. If it doesn't improve and it does bother you (it would bother me!) then I think there are just two options. Either you find someone else who you get along with better and you switch advisors, or you value his advising too much and you stay despite the personal uncomfortableness. If you do, I'd urge you to seek out a second mentor who you do get along with. I think it'll make your life a lot better.

Hi there, the title says "urgent" but really this just looks like your homework. This forum is meant for students who are either applying to graduate school or are in graduate school to talk about their experiences and ask for advice. It is not meant for students to ask for help with their homework, or indeed try and get someone else to do their homework for them.

Wow, I am so glad none of my schools wanted that. I had a hard enough time explaining to my school what sealed envelopes were (ended up actually doing it myself - was invited into the office, stamped the seal on each envelope, and had the secretary sign on top--she really had no idea what I wanted from her)! They definitely would not have agreed to mail transcripts for me internationally. It would not have been cheap, and it's just not a service they provide.

As long as the envelopes are sealed and signed, it's normally not a problem if you send them yourself. Most of the time recommenders will mail their own letters but I did have one who wanted me to mail everything for him, and the schools I applied to didn't have a problem with it. If you're mailing in materials, I think it's better to send everything together to minimize the chance that things will get lost or misfiled, but in general you can send the materials however you like - all together or each separate or anything in between. Each time something arrives, someone in admissions will add it to your file until it is complete.

This post is locked because it has been cross-posted in another forum. To reply, follow the link here:

Every school I applied to was ok with me mailing my own transcripts, as long as they were in signed and sealed envelopes.

You list the experience you will have at the time of submitting the application. That is the only thing you can guarantee to be true (you can't guarantee that you'll still be at your job a year from now). Anyone who wants to can calculate how much more experience you'll have by the time you start school.

I never contacted anyone, so every one of my acceptances was from a school where I had no prior contact with anyone before my acceptance. (Most didn't do interviews, including the school whose offer I accepted.) That said, every school that accepted me had several professors who were potential advisors, with significant overlap in research interests. I didn't apply to places that only had one potential match because of concern like you are mentioning -- what if we didn't get along, or they left, etc. I guess if you've already paid you don't have much to lose, but honestly I wouldn't want to attend such a school. You'd be setting yourself up for a world of pain. How can you get through a PhD without at least minimal supervision?

How times have changed. When I applied there was only one school that accepted scanned transcripts (and only wanted an original if/when I would be accepted, and even then only if I chose to accept their offer,) all the others wanted hard copy originals submitted with the application. So, it depends. I'd suggest you ask the school if you aren't sure.

Schools understand that students can't control when their recommenders submit their letters. There is usually some leniency here, and recommenders often know that and take advantage of this grace period. Of course I can't guarantee that there isn't ever going to be a super-strict school, but these very short delays with responsive profs who promise to do it almost always work out just fine. (It's the cases where a prof disappears and becomes unresponsive where the horror stories usually come from.)

I don't think that this is something any of us can help you with. You're asking us what we think you should do research on, but that is such an individual decision, how can we know? Assuming that you really can't do work with the group whose interests are most closely aligned with yours, you have no choice but to rank the pros and cons of the other groups against each other. How important is it that it's medical-related research? How important is it to have variety in possible projects? How important is it that the professor is well established? My guess is that based on what you've already told us is important to you, group 1 is more of a risk than the other two (with work that might lead no where and a new professor). Of the remaining two, the third group is the one with more opportunities, but you need to somehow decide if it's the kind of research you could become interested in. No one here can tell you that. Disclaimer: I am from a completely different field so this is based entirely on your post and some informed guess work. Take with a spoonful of salt.

Hi questionforforums, What you are describing is a very unfortunate situation that I'm sorry you're in, but I think that you are also very self-reflective and I think that is a great quality that will allow you come out of this as best as possible. From what you describe, it sounds to me like you've basically already decided not to pursue an academic career. That's a perfectly legitimate choice that you should not feel bad about! However, my guess is that you are still acting as if you *are* pursuing such a career, both in terms of how you present yourself to family, friends, and colleagues, and how you are using your academic training. I think that the first thing to do is to embrace (at least privately, since obviously no one forces you to share your career decisions with anyone) the fact that you are going to have a non-academic career. Once you make this mental switch, then the next goal is to try and decide what kind of career that is, at least in broad terms. Then, you want to seek out opportunities at your program, school, and community, to enhance the skills you'll need to have for this new chosen path. This may take you in several different directions. It may be the case that a purely theoretical dissertation in the humanities is not the best way to spend your time; for example, maybe you should find a more applied topic, or have an experimental or stats component, or find a 'sexier' title, to make your PhD more marketable. Maybe you want to be developing other skills altogether, like computer or design skills, or you want to get into education or editing (throwing out random examples here). Your school may have lots of resources that can help you start on this new career path that you don't even know about, but you could start exploring once you decide on new intermediate and long-term goals. For example, lots of schools have a dedicated office for helping students find jobs, where you could get targeted advice for leaving academia and finding non-academic jobs that you have skills and training for. Once you have decided not to go into academia, the *quality* of your dissertation research matters less; it may be a better investment of your time to do just enough to get out of your program with the degree, and invest the extra time in other things, like training or job-hunting outside academia. Or, it's possible that finishing the degree is not the best use of your time at all and you should instead be pursuing another education, internship, or job opportunity (though it's hard to get past the sunk cost fallacy). I truly believe that each of us have the skills and capacity to be successful at more than one thing. I think that once you identify a new goal that you can be successful at, and start actively pursuing ways of making it happen, you will start to feel much better about your life. You can have new achievements and be more successful that way, and the PhD will end up being just one step along this new path.

I see. Well, then I'd ask someone. I suppose they probably put up these different requirements at different times, but honestly 3-5 pages sounds like way more than necessary. Unless you are particularly accomplished (and even then!), you should be able to tell them who you are and what you want to study in under two pages.

Oh. Your post says "I am applying to all medical schools in the Boston area", which is probably a source of confusion, then. I'd suggest trying in a field-specific forum. You might get relevant more people to see your post there. But more generally, I want to reiterate something we often say when people post questions like yours, and that's that we are not experts and can't really predict your chances, so take the replies you get with a grain of salt.