fuzzylogician

Unless the prof has kept up with colleagues, they may not know the department culture as well and may not comment on it. 40 years is a long time. That said, over the course of 40 years, a person will have a lot of experience placing students in various grad programs, and therefore might instead write something like this: "Stu has a similar work style to former students X, Y, and Z, who have been successful in your program in recent years." As a general rule, I think it's actually entirely acceptable for someone to write not only that someone is a good candidate because of research interests but also that, in particular, their work style/character would fit well with the particular department. To me, that's still a part of the candidate's qualities. One might still write that about departments they never attended or taught at, but certainly one's opinion would carry more weight if they actually have first-hand experience in what they're talking about.

It seems to me that this teacher might still be the best option. I think the hesitation is entirely natural, and I'd be concerned if such hesitation wasn't expressed. It's been 10 years after all, and as a result, there is only so much that the letter can say, especially if you didn't ask for a letter back then. If you did, then the prof will perhaps have something on file to refer back to. If not and this is a new letter, I think it's safe to say that this person probably doesn't remember you, or at least won't be able to share details and anecdotes. Strong letters are ones that are detailed and can give examples, which this one won't be able to do that. So here are some suggestions for next steps. First, since you're targeting a specific program, have you thought about reaching out to them and asking what they would prefer? They might want two academic letters, or they might tell you it's best to have two detailed recent letters, even if that means that they're not academic. I could see it going either way. Second, I'd look into submitting four letters: two more detailed/recent ones that won't be academic, and two academic, including the recent one and your advisor. Even if it's technically not allowed, since you have a special case, it's worth asking about explicitly. Third, if you do ask your advisor, you need to help her write you a strong letter. That means providing her materials to rely on (your SOP, writing sample, a summary of things you think she can say, your transcript, etc), and offering to talk/Skype with her, if she'd like. Again, strong letters are ones where the person can say they know the student, think they're a strong candidate, and can provide details about their opinion; if she can't remember you from 10 years ago (which is quite likely), help her generate some opinions/memories now.

I wouldn't get a letter from someone who's been fired for misconduct unless I absolutely had to. In your case, the letter you describe doesn't sound terribly strong, unless there's more he can say than what you told us. I would suggest scheduling a meeting with the Director of Undergraduate Studies, to talk about this issue. If this is the strongest letter you can get, maybe it can come from the DUS instead of this prof, or maybe it can be co-written.

^Seconding this. It's not exactly about legacy, but one important factor is that people tend to trust people they know more than people they don't, for obvious reasons. So if you compare a letter from a former student you know and trust with a letter from an unknown prof somewhere, it's easy to see how one would carry more weight than the other. Another advantage this kind of letter has is that when a former student writes "I think X is a good fit with the department", they really know what they're talking about, not just from the perspective of research fit (which you can get from others) but also in the sense that they understand the culture of the department. It's a fact that different departments have different cultures, for example in how much collaboration happens among students/faculty, or how competitive students tend to be, or how much freedom students have in selecting courses/committees/etc, or how often students present in reading groups and share with others, or how much coursework/collaboration happens with other departments, and different people need different levels of those things to be happy. That's independent of whether someone can support your interests. For example, you could have a department that could support your interests, but if you really thrive in an environment that pushes you a lot, you might not be happy if said department is very hands off and you only meet with advisors twice a semester. On the other hand, someone else who shares your interests but enjoys working off on their own a lot might be a better fit. So when a former student writes that your work style and personality fit with a department, the department can really take that opinion seriously.

^Seconding this. Although we can't make you any promises, there is often some leeway for letter writers to submit after the official deadline (while everything the student submits absolutely has to be there on time!). Often LOR writers know from their own experience that the only thing that really matters is that letters arrive before the adcom meets to discuss files, and that takes some time after the official deadline, while some administrative processes are taking place. I'm not going to tell you not to worry, but really, don't worry. If your LOR writer is aware of the request and says she's on top of it, she knows what she's doing, even if it's causing you some distress.

I don't think it's a responsibility exactly, but I think it's the professional thing to do as a senior student toward junior students. Junior students will often take time to adjust, especially if they have some unusual circumstance (first generation, international, etc). Not everyone will reach out, and they won't always know who is a good person to talk to -- that takes time. It's just a nice thing to do to reach out to those students once you've been around for a while and help them out. It's often part of the department culture. If someone did that for you, you'd be more likely to do it for someone else. You don't even necessarily have to be senior -- even a second year student will have a lot of wisdom to impart on first-years.

It's fine to use the same evidence to support arguments in multiple papers. You'll need to cite the original source(s) of that evidence in each one of your papers. If you do re-use arguments from your previous work, you need to cite that work, too. For classwork, things might be a little different: you should consult with your professors as to how much overlap they allow between work submitted for their class and old work. But in any event, you always cite any paper you used in your work.

1. Yes, if you interacted with them outside of class and they have something more to say than just "X attended my class and got an A". 2. One letter could be from a different department, especially for an MA application. Again, you'd want it to be able to be more than just a Did Well In Class letter. If you're just getting one of those, at least get it from a philosophy professor. However, I'm not sure I see the point of a letter from a regular job, unless it's glowing and preferably talks about transferrable skills. Otherwise, it's hard to see how it would help. Overall, it's fine to have an okay third letter if the first two are strong. 3. Writing letters is part of a professor's job. You don't need to apologize or feel like you're stealing their time in any way. Just be sure to help them help you: provide them with a CV, SOP, and anything else they ask, so they can write you as strong a letter as possible. You might even offer to give them a short summary of what you hope the letter will contain. But in any event, as long as you're professional and respectful, this is a part of their job so you don't need to feel like you're taking their time away from their job.

1. Assisting with research could be "research assistant" under "research experience". Briefly list who led the project and what you did (1-2 lines). 2. Yes.

Hm, can't say I've heard of too many cases where an applicant was contacted and asked to rewrite an already submitted SOP, but I'd take it as a positive sign, because if they were going to simply reject you, they wouldn't need a revised statement, they'd just do it. As for the interview, interviewees are often terrible at assessing how they did; since you have no reference point for how others did or what the interviewer was expecting, I think it's best not to dwell, hard as it may be. Now, two thoughts: for any future interviews, you could and should always ask about the timeline post-interview when they ask you if you have any questions for them (usually happens toward the end of the interview). For this one, I would say if it'd been more than 10 days, you could simply email and ask about the timeline (if it were right after, you could email to say thank you and ask about the timeline, but now is a little late for that..). It's hard to give a general one-size-fits-all answer; these things can really vary according to circumstances.

Plans change. As long as you went in with the right intentions, I think you need to stop it with the guilt and self-doubt about having changed your mind. You thought you wanted X, you tried it out, and you've realized it's not for you and really your passion is in Y. That's a perfectly common and sensible course of affairs. Stop worrying about taking up someone else's spot. You went into the program in good faith and the spot is yours. You don't owe anyone else anything -- you have to give yourself the best shot at what you want (at any given time). So, that's the first thing I want to say. I'd have said this if you were funded by the department, and certainly if you've taken out loans to do it. Now, the next step in your decision process has several moving parts to it. I assume that it's too late to apply for PhD programs this year, unless you can find programs with January deadlines and really push it. So we're likely talking applying next fall for a start time of two years from now. While you get ready to apply and start over, the question is what you want to accomplish where you are now, with the ultimate goal in mind of eventually returning to your CS route. It's possible that the certificate is the wiser choice, if you don't feel like there's more that you can/want to take from your current program, or actually since you'll have the time to finish the two-year degree, if you can still see the reasons you went into it in the first place and you can make it work, maybe there are reasons to stay through. Either way, one very important point is that you'll need LORs from your current program, so it'd be advantageous to do things in consultation with them, so you have their support. They might have their own opinions about what's the better choice. Another very relevant factor is your mental health. If your current program is making you unhappy, in my book that'd be a very good reason to leave with the certificate and find another thing to do while you apply next year that makes you happier. You might also look into requirements for the PhD applications; for example, maybe there's a writing sample requirement, in which case you'll want to make sure you have one of those before you leave, which you can get some feedback on. There's also the question of tuition vs perhaps working and earning some money next year.. I think it's time for some strategizing.

Question: is it possible for you to obtain a "just ok" letter? If you have two good ones, a third letter, even if no more than a "did well in class" type letter, should still be fine and will allow you to apply to all those departments that want 3 letters.

Write the program and ask for advice on what to do. I'm not sure if by "not submitted successfully" you mean something like "I failed to click the right button, nothing was submitted even though I thought it was, but I never received an email confirmation" or more like 'I submitted and got a confirmation, but later learned that actually the submission was corrupted or there was some other problem". If the latter then you should be perfectly fine, you just demonstrate that you have a confirmation email of timely submission and ask to fix whatever's wrong. If the former, then I think you need to email, apologize, explain the situation, and ask for their mercy. They will have to make a decision about what to do. The sooner you call/write the better, since it's already Friday, and a week after the deadline.

In principle, a leave should mean that everything goes on hold, and you get to pick things back up when you're back as if you were never gone. In practice, this really has to be something you figure out with your department, especially when it comes to what to do with this past semester. Even if they don't have clear policies in place, they're going to need to answer these questions. Better ask them now and go through the process of getting answers together than be surprised later. You should be clear on what you want to happen and what you expect. Try to find local resources, such as the office of students with disabilities, dean of students, or similar, where I'm sure they've dealt with issues like this in the past. They should have an idea of what's common and what's possible, and maybe you can get someone from there directly involved in advocating on your behalf.

That's what you have advisors for.

Generally speaking, people write letters based on their own experience with a student. They may take into account colleagues' opinions, but eventually if they write and sign a letter, it indicates that it expresses their opinion, not that of anyone else.

You shouldn't force anyone to write you a letter. Even if it's technically part of their job description, you can't dictate the content, so telling them they have to do it could very easily lead to a bad outcome. I would personally not ask anyone for a reference who I don't think would write a strong and supportive letter. I doubt that a weak letter from someone who hardly remembers you will be all that helpful, but I don't think that pushing someone to write a letter who doesn't want to makes any sense whatsoever. If you don't have access to supportive letter writers at this time, you might need to slow down and build up your network so you can later apply for the degree you want.

I suppose my main response as someone who might be reading applications is that I care a whole lot less about an unfinished project listed on someone's CV than I do about their actual ability to discuss said project and future plans for its development in their SOP. I guess I am not all that impressed with the fact that someone chose the thesis option, but I'm hoping to be impressed by the content of the work.

A (finished) thesis, yes. But just like I wouldn't put a paper on my CV until it is at least ready to be submitted, if not actually submitted (listed as "under review"), I wouldn't list a project that is in very early data collection stages. That's simply premature. Once you actually have a deliverable, sure, go ahead and list it. But you can't list plans and hopes in your CV, only facts.

I'd send the longer one. Three pages isn't that long, really. Your writer wants to know more about you and your strengths. They may or may not include that information in their letter, but it'll help them put what they know about you in a broader context. Give them the context and let them choose what to do with it.

1. No way to tell, you'll need to contact the schools and ask. Most likely they will not have a problem with a late LOR before they start reviewing applications, and things get more complicated after that (caveat: they may have a strict policy on late materials, but in many cases late letters are somewhat different because the student can't control that.) 2. Once materials are reviewed, one of two things can happen: they can decide that they like your file anyway, and then they may decide to interview/admit you anyway, or they may contact you and ask about your missing letter. Or they may disregard the file as incomplete. No way for us to tell which one will happen. 3. As a general rule, if this is a strong letter, then not having it would make your file weaker. If it's a so-so letter, then maybe not having it won't make all that much of a difference. I would suggest stopping by his office in person, or calling the department during work hours tomorrow (or going over there) to ask if there is any way to get in touch with the prof. Maybe there was some family emergency. Or maybe they really suck at emails, but if the secretary can leave the prof a note, things could move faster. It's usually easier to get information by talking to someone instead of emailing with this question.

I wouldn't include it in my CV, unless it's an official research assistant position. Talk about it in your SOP.

I think that "incredibly bad advice" is far too strong of a statement. There are advantages to having junior mentors and to having senior mentors, and really like t_ruth says, a student should have a good mixture of both. I just really don't see why sticking with the senior person is always (or more often) the right answer, instead of saying that it depends on (personal) fit and interests and the individuals involved. Some junior people are rising stars and certainly have name-recognition and a good network. Some senior people are very inactive (or worse, hated or disregarded, which as an undergrad or beginning grad student you may not even know). Some junior people are wonderful mentors and are willing to invest in learning how to be a good advisor, and some senior people are notoriously terrible advisors. (And vice-versa, obviously.) Most junior people are much more willing to learn and adjust and go the extra mile than senior people, in my experience. Most junior people will be more familiar with cutting-edge research and new methods, whereas it's not unheard of for a senior person to decide that they really enjoyed some theory from the 80s and that's what they're going to continue doing. They can get away with that, but their students have more of a hard time, despite the boost of the famous advisor. For me, working with a combination of junior people and senior people was the best solution. At the end of the day, junior people need to get experience, otherwise you'll just be pushing the problem past tenure but you'll still have a set of unexperienced profs and a set of famous and apparently busy-with-tons-of-advising profs.* That's not going to be a reasonable way for a department to operate. But either way, disrespecting someone who reaches out to you is outright silly, and that seems to be a gendered property, which is the point of this thread and which I wholeheartedly agree with. *As an aside, as a junior person who's just beginning to advise, these early experiences will most likely shape my advising style for years to come. I'm sure I make mistakes, but I also put a lot more into it than my colleagues. I see this for students who I co-advise in how much input they get, how fast they get it, and eventually who they come to with their questions. The senior people definitely have a lot to contribute, but so do I.

@Dalmatian Yes, I have had students cry in my office, usually in circumstances not unlike what you're describing. It happens. Not much you can do about an uncontrollable emotion that sweeps over you, so I'm glad to hear that your professor handled it well. @Berk Oh, that really doesn't sound healthy for someone in their first semester. I would strongly advise you to look for support elsewhere, be it through moving to another lab/supervisor or by simply finding a mentor who isn't your advisor. It can be an advanced student, a faculty member, maybe someone in a specialized support group (those exist!). But don't just keep going like this for too long, because you'll find it very hard to finish, and I'd personally question whether you should. A PhD is not worth 5 years of suffering.

In all fairness, you should have confidence that it'll be fine, because it's exceedingly likely that it will be. This is an annoying way to put it, perhaps, but your prof is right. (I also hope you didn't say things like "I told you I'd like you to do it by Friday" to your prof, because that may rub some people the wrong way. Especially while you still need something from her, it's good to remember the power structure in the relationship.)