fuzzylogician

vats77 -- I've edited out some personal information, to help maintain you anonymity. None of it matters for the present purposes, in my opinion. I've also moved the post to a more appropriate location than where you posted it. I don't have to do a close edit of this post at the moment but even if I did, I wouldn't know how to begin. Can you tell us what this will be used for? Will it be accompanying an entire application where you elaborate on all the details here, or are you planning on sending this alone to make contact with potential advisors, or something else? It's hard to know how to help without knowing what the document will be used for.

Well, the good(?) news is I'm pretty sure everybody feels this way at some point. Writing a dissertation is like nothing we've done before (and if we're lucky, after). It's very hard to give advice about how to approach such a monolithic project without knowing more about you, your field, your personality and your research habits. Assuming (probably incorrectly) that I can use my experience to say something more general, the following thoughts come to mind. Do you have a research proposal? Or at least some list of the main questions or ideas you are pursuing and what your answers will be? If not, then this is a useful thing to do for yourself because it helps solidify the problems you are working on and the paths to answering them. Or, at least it helps you see what directions you might want to think about. Even if you have a research proposal, you may want to sit down and create a sort of outline of the argument(s) and how they break up into topics and maybe chapters. Keep in mind that these things are fluid and you're really not going to know how a particular chapter is going to be structured until you start writing it. I had several potential leads or problems at various stages of my work that will not make it into my dissertation because despite my efforts turns out I have nothing interesting to say about them. I personally think it's hard to do "research" because it's so amorphic it's hard to know if you're on the right track or completely off. What helped me in the "research" stage was to define smaller problems or questions and create handouts for myself (and for my advisors) that present a dataset and a question about it, or a proposal for a theory, or a rambly discussion of what desiderata we might need to account for some data and why that's hard to do in current theories, or a list of open issues that I'd need more data to address and an attempt to start collecting the data. You get my point. Some of these handout end up being more useful than others but it helps to put your thoughts on paper, and it will be useful later to have all the data written up. Arranging the data in a handout to create a narrative around it helps you see how you will want to structure your argument and it might help you see where the argument needs strengthening, which is an identifiable "research" step you could take. When you have enough of these handouts that address specific parts of your work, it'll be easier to look at your outline and see how things fit together, what you have done, and where you still have work to do. The outline will remain in flux for a good portion of your "research" stage and perhaps even into the writing. This is fine, so don't worry. Trying to impose a structure on a project this large is hard and takes time. The more information you have, the better. So if you get stuck on a certain problem, at this point it may be good to put it aside for a while and work on something else. As I mentioned, there will inevitably be things you won't solve, or that won't be perfect. That, too, is fine. I'm in the beginning of the writing stage myself. By the end of three months, I will have written an entire dissertation, defended it, made revisions, and filed. (And moved to another country, and started an new job). That is crazy. All I can tell you is that I think everyone--regardless of how well you think they're doing--goes through these moments of doubt. It's sometimes hard to believe that the people who you are sure are good to go and have a lot of stuff going on think that there is something wrong with them and that you are so much better off than them. But then when it's crunch time, somehow everybody pulls through one way or another, and it ends up ok. I'm not going to tell you you're going to necessarily enjoy it all, but it helps (me) to remember that this is time limited, it's not forever or even for very long, all things considered. When I was in the cloud, it helped me to talk frankly with my advisors, who were very supportive, and with friends who had gone through the process the year or two before me. They gave me some perspective on how it felt for them (including describing everything that I was feeling, from the doubts to feeling I can't do it to just being overwhelmed), and some of their advice was very useful. More than anything, though, I was reassured that what I was feeling was normal, and for me at least that made a big difference.

I complain, therefore I am. Everybody does it, it's a good way of working through difficulties--and grad school is pretty hard. Also, can be all-consuming. If some people do it more often than you like, restrict the content you see from them on Facebook. Or, as Eigen suggests, complain about it vent to your friends over alcohol.

I agree that this rationale is unreasonable (in fact, I have an earlier post in this thread saying just that). However, I am reading this quote from a later post: Those actions, in my field, get you first authorship. I assume that generating the grant and designing the study also means coming up with the idea that this project was based on. The PI is then also heavily involved in the execution of the study, and the OP did some analyses on the results. At least in my field, doing the analysis will get you on the authors list but by itself it wouldn't make you first. Coming up with the idea is the hardest part, and next (I think) is spelling it out convincingly and in enough details so that you can get the study funded. Execution and analysis are of course also important, but those are things that are easier to delegate to people who become secondary contributors to the paper. Yeah, if the OP had done all the work and then the PI had given that excuse. But it looks like the PI is the main person on this project and deserves first authorship. I don't know why they would explain it the OP quotes, that's an odd thing to say given the more straightforward "I did the work, I deserve the credit." Edit: Also, "typical case of grad cafe people blah blah blah" -- please. With 60 posts and less than a month as a member, maybe you want to read some more before you make these ridiculous claims. Long-time posters regularly take time out of their day to write thoughtful responses trying to help people deal with difficult situations. We support people who come here with issues that we think are justified, and we're not afraid to say when we thing someone's misinterpreting their situation. In this case, in my opinion, the OP is actually not seeing the whole picture given the details they gave. I've tried to explain why I think that. If you disagree with my reasoning, feel free to tell us why and we can have a discussion.

Does it matter for anything?

First of all, it's not clear at all that in this case the OP actually deserves first authorship. Second, it does matter who the data belongs to. There are established norms about this in different fields and it's important to respect them. If you publish a paper using your advisor's data without her consent (and therefore perhaps without her as co-author at all?), assuming you somehow get this past reviewers and journal editors, you're effectively stealing. You're obviously going to get caught because there will be a publication. Once it's out, good luck ever having another collaboration, a postdoc, and perhaps a job. Stealing someone's data and publishing without their consent is a serious very offense. If I thought there was a chance a potential collaborator would unilaterally take joint work and publish it--with or without my name on it, but without my input to the paper and without my consent--I wouldn't touch them with a pole. Whatever they bring to the table, it's not worth my work being stolen or alternatively my name appearing on things I didn't authorize. Same goes for a collaborator who thinks they can unilaterally change the order of authors on the paper and submit it that way because they feel they should be first. This is even simpler if I were your potential advisor for a PhD or postdoc--I'd never take on a student who I know might suddenly decide to take a project we were working on together and proceed to publication without consulting me, under any version of what comes next (with my name/without, same/different order, etc.).

I have a 13'' machine. I have a docking station with a large screen at home, and I have a second monitor I connect it to at the office. That way, I get the extra screen real estate when I need it, but the computer itself is light and portable. I had a 14.1'' machine before this and I didn't feel like I lost anything because the screen is now smaller, but I've never had a 15'' machine so I'm not sure how it would compare.

Common sense based guesses here: - You could say you noticed a typo and ask to replace your CV with a new version. Attach it to the email to avoid an unnecessary back-and-forth with the admin people. - I don't think this typo will cause any serious harm (by itself, assuming there are no other issues), though obviously it also won't help. - I don't think there is any harm in having a "related coursework" section on your CV for positions that might be interested in that. I'd have it at the end and I wouldn't keep it later on in your grad school career. I also might recommend not having it if you have a more relevant section of "research experience" for previous RA-related jobs you might have had. Unless you're submitting the CV for a job at the same school where you took the courses, the course numbers are going to be meaningless. What would be more helpful are (1) the course name, (2) a short description of the content (especially for courses like "topics in Russian lit"), (3) the level of the class (beginning, seminar, grad-level, etc.), (4) possibly: the name of the instructor, and the textbook that was used in class (if it's that kind of class). A list is fine, starting with the most recent coursework and working backwards like in other CV sections, though I don't know what other format you would have in mind.

At this point in your career I think you should put the school symposium on your CV. It at least shows that you're out there presenting, even if it's only at local/small conferences. Once you'll have better things (bigger, national/international conferences), you'll want to take these early entries out of your CV. As for the paper, you could either list it separately under a "papers" heading, or together with the presentations in a "presentations and publications" section. Since the presentations are in local conferences and the publication is in a 'real' one, my guess is that separate headings might highlight that better. It'll also highlight that you only have one paper, though, so it's up to you which one you think looks best.

The Department of Linguistics and Philosophy at MIT has an opening for a full-time Lab Manager in Linguistics. Responsibilities include equipment and software maintenance as well as technical and programming support for the Experimental Syntax and Semantics Lab (ESSL; http://web.mit.edu/hackl/www/lab/) and the Phonetics and Phonology Lab, participant recruitment, database management, and proctoring for experimental research projects in syntax, semantics, and language acquisition, undergraduate and graduate student training in experimental tasks and techniques (statistical analysis, programming experimental scripts), and IRB support. Qualified applicants should have a BA/BS or MA/MS in a cognitive science-related discipline (psychology, linguistics, neuroscience, etc.) or computer science, a solid background in statistics and experience with Javascript/html, R, Matlab, and Python. Preferred start date is July 1, 2014, but this is negotiable. Salary and rank will be commensurate with experience. Submit cover letter, CV and names and contact information for three references at the application URL below. Application Deadline: (Open until filled) Web Address for Applications: https://academicjobsonline.org/ajo/jobs/4033 Contact Information: Professor Martin Hackl Email: hacklmit.edu (link to ad here: http://linguistlist.org/issues/25/25-1884.html)

Yes, it's also my understanding that you can continue to be on a J-1 visa for several years after you graduate with your PhD, either on OPT or as a postdoc. What you can't do is switch to an immigration class visa and/or apply for a green card. I know there is a waiver you can apply for, but I've heard it's very hard to get (at least for some forms of funding). If you know you want to return to your home country or get a job in a third country after your PhD, there is no problem. But for anyone who wants to have the option of obtaining a TT (or other permanent) job in the US after their PhD/postdoc, this is something to keep in mind. As someone who didn't really know for sure at the time, the F seemed safer than the J because it didn't have this potential complication and since I didn't have a spouse it wasn't a problem. If I had had a spouse, I would have probably chosen the J because my SO's happiness for the duration of my 5-6 year degree is more important than a potential job much later down the line. In this case the OP doesn't have a spouse, so I think the F is safer. However, even after 5 years in the US I'm still not sure what the differences between the F and J are (for single people) so there may be other reasons I'm not aware of to prefer the J over the F.

Don't take it the wrong way but I think you're wasting your time worrying about this rejection. I'm sure spending a whole paragraph in your SOP talking about how you want to work with someone who is no longer there did not help you but there may have been other factors that went into the decision and you just can't know. The reason I think you shouldn't worry about it is that rejections happen fairly often in academia and you need to be able to just keep going and not get hung up on the things that were unsuccessful. If there was anything to learn from this (e.g. if you needed to reapply to grad school next year) I'd probably think differently but since you already have two acceptances, I think it's better to just move on and not over-think this.

Well it really kind of depends where 'home' is and what the job opportunities are like there.

Here are some other threads about this question, to get you started. One question you should figure out is whether or not you'd be subject to the two-year rule in case you choose the J-1 (this requires students who were on the J-1 visa to return to their home countries for two years after their visa expires). This depends on the source of your funding, and although it's hard to plan it could limit your career choices in ways that it may be better to avoid. Other than that, there are some minor differences but for unmarried students I'm not sure I know of any major differences. FWIW I chose the F-1 and haven't had any issues with it.

Not to be a downer or anything but if you're interested in a PhD/academia to get away from the politics, you may be in for a rude awakening. "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." By way of corollary: "That is why academic politics are so bitter." (Sayre's law)

In that case it sounds like you will probably end up taking that class, but for future reference even if everything you say is right and it's clearly better to do things the way you suggest, I'd approach this as a question/discussion and not as a foregone conclusion. I think it's unlikely that a reasonable advisor will forbid you from taking classes that are relevant to your interests, are required for a certification that you're trying to obtain, and are not frequently offered, but your advisor may have other considerations that you're not aware of. It's better to come to an agreement with your advisor than to seem to demand things. The end result will likely be the same but it'll come across much better.

Two things. First, before going on the job market earlier this year, I received the advice to take off my CV insignificant awards (awarded long ago, small amounts, rather obscure source). These entries cluttered my CV and distracted from the large, more significant awards I had received during my PhD. The rationale is that you want your CV to be very impressive, and that's easier to see at a glance if you only list large/prestigious awards and don't drown them out with smaller ones. This is assuming that whoever will read my CV will not spend very long on it and will skim more than carefully read, so there is a bigger chance they'll be distracted by the small stuff and miss the bigger stuff the more small awards I list. Of course YMMV and this probably depends on what entries you could have on your CV. I don't see the problem with listing an 'alternate' or 'honorable mention' status for prestigious awards. Yes, you would be upset at not winning and might not proudly announce that on facebook, but you nonetheless finished among the better ranked candidates in the competition and that's nothing to frown at. Again, whether or not I'd actually list a particular entry would depend on the situation so e.g. finishing 30 out of 100 might not make it onto my CV even if I got an honorable mention (and those rates are known to whoever will be reading my CV), but finishing 30 out of 1000 might.

FWIW I applied for an F-1 visa and from what I remember my funding information was only about the first year. I wasn't asked about that at all. I do think it might depend on individual cases and whether or not your case raises suspicion that you might not be funded beyond your first year. However, the 'funding conditional upon good standing' clause is pretty standard in funding letters so I think you don't need to worry about that. That said, I totally understand why you do worry. Maybe your school's international students office can give you more information.

The funding question needs to be addressed to your program's admin person because this is probably something that depends on each program/school's policies. The "should I do it" question should have been addressed to your advisor prior to informing them that you're attending this class. I've taken extra classes outside my department and it was not frowned upon at all (and I didn't need to pay for them) but I did that after I had completed my required courses and was well advanced in my research. I know of peers who tried to do the same and whose advisors did not like it because it took away time that they thought should be spent on research. OP, if you presented this is a fact to your advisor, it may not be bad to try and walk it back a bit by asking them what they think about this move. If you get a negative response, I'd take it seriously and avoid taking the extra class.

Assuming you mean awards that you were granted but did not take for some reason (e.g. because you won a better award and could not take both), I think it's fair game to list the award but I think it only makes sense to do this with awards of considerable dollar amounts/prestige. Also, an exception (I think) is if you were offered some prestigious award as part of an admissions package to a school whose offer you decided to decline. I think you're technically not given those awards until/unless you actually accept the admissions offer. Another exception: if you were accepted to a conference and chose not to attend, I think it's in poor taste to list it on your CV (though I know some people who do). And, of course, if the question is about listing things you applied to but did not get, the answer is not to list them at all.

Visa questions are usually better answered here because more relevant people will notice them. Of course some of the same people read multiple forums so you might still get good answers elsewhere .

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

You didn't make a fool of yourself. Calling and leaving messages at this point is perfectly acceptable and what you said also sounds reasonable. I'm sorry this is happening to you; the wait can be really awful. I hope you hear back soon.

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

If it were me, I'd choose to end the relationship when I moved, and spend the rest of the time before then mentally adjusting to that thought as best I could. Starting grad school will be an adjustment period anyway and I think it'd be better for you not to lose that first year (or however long it takes for the relationship to finally end) trying to keep the relationship alive instead of making connections in your new location and concentrating on classes. An LDR is hard enough when everyone is very committed, and I think it's pretty much impossible otherwise. Seems to me it makes more sense to minimize the time to the end of the relationship and to make the transition as painless as it can be, given the circumstances. A move is a natural way to make that transition, in my opinion.