fuzzylogician

I would stick with letters from your MEd program. The lack of a letter from your undergraduate institution might raise red flags, but the letter you described will also raise red flags. In fact, it will do so in a much more concrete way than someone who might wonder why you didn't submit a letter from any undergrad professor. If this comes up in any interview or conversation with a potential advisor, you should be very careful about how you frame this issue. It sounds like you've learned a lot and accept responsibility for what happened, but you still look for blame in the institution as well. It may be the case that you should have been better advised; but I would not bring that up directly since it might be perceived as making excuses. You can describe the advising situation and the state of affairs that led to miscommunication or misinformation, but let whoever you are speaking draw their own conclusions about who's responsible for what happened. I'm sure that the visiting person who was put in charge of your project mid-way through was also not thrilled about the situation, and might very legitimately not have been aware of IRB approval procedures at your institution; it's unfortunate that this person also prefers not to read students' drafts but that too happens on occasion and again I'd be wary of making that be the explanation for what went wrong.

You essentially got a polite 'no.' It's a real shame, but it's better to cut your losses and invest your time in finding a different letter writer than to get a less-than-enthusiastic letter from your project manager. I don't think you want a letter from someone who doesn't want to write it - that could do much more harm than good.

Depends on several factors like how much it will cost and what you can afford. My initial instinct is to say - don't go immediately, instead ask to have a phone conversation. You can learn a lot about how you get along with an advisor by having a one-on-one conversation with them. Granted, it's better to go in person, but I'm not sure if it's worth the hundreds of dollars it might cost. Moreover, if you get accepted into the program or are a finalist, many schools will fly you in on their expense. That would be a better time to visit, if it works out.

In some fields MAs are good for professionalization reasons. In research fields, you do an MA if you're not sure yet that you want to do a PhD, using it as kind of an entry point into academia and research, or you do one if you need to improve your application in some ways - e.g., gaining research experience or publications or getting better LORs. If you already know you want to do a PhD and you can get accepted into the program of your dreams without improving your application, it seems to me that going directly for the PhD is the more straightforward way to go.

The writing score is one of the least important parts of the application. If you submit strong essays and your verbal score is good, your writing score should not cause you much trouble, if any.

I agree with TakeruK - if you prefer to communicate via Skype, email your project manager to set up a Skype meeting. Let her know in the email what the conversation will be about, so she's not surprised by your request. Then try and have an honest conversation with her about your performance and what a letter from her might include. Hopefully that way you can decide whether or not it's a good idea to have this letter as part of your application.

There are conferences at all kinds of levels that accept all kinds of work, including the two kinds you mentioned, but I think it's generally much more common for conferences to accept talks on new research as opposed to talks that don't present any new contribution to the field. Review-type talks tend to be invited talks by speakers who are much more experienced and respected in their field. If your synthesis/review work does contribute something new - e.g. you show that some data that is usually not regarded as related to each other should be considered together to solve some problem, or you show that a problem in your field should be recast in some other terms, then that would probably get accepted. Simple review articles that just summarize what others have said - probably not. Re: proceedings papers: some very prestigious conferences in my field don't have proceedings, so that's not a good measure to go by when you decide whether a conference is good or not. If you don't know a conference, ask your professor or more advanced students in your department about it.

What works for me is to have a detailed plan of what I'm doing - (1) today, (2) this week, (3) this semester, (4) this year, and (5) for my degree. You're probably not a stage to map out what you want to do before you graduate but you can look up some milestones in your program (quals, prospectus, etc) to have an idea of the overall structure of your program. Then it's useful to think about your semester and/or year. What classes are you taking and what kind of work do they require? When are papers for your classes due? Are you going to any conferences? Are there abstract deadlines or talks scheduled? Are you presenting in your classes or departmental reading groups? These questions can help you map out your semester. From there you can identify busy weeks and less busy weeks, and try to have realistic goals for each week. In a busy week you might get less done beside the absolute crucial tasks, and in other weeks you can try for more. Eigen's suggestion to schedule "time" goals as well as "work" goals is very useful to help prevent you from going overboard. Two important things to keep in mind: First, things take more time than you think. Budget for spillover time, because you'll need it. Second, everyone has off days, and besides adjusting to this kind of workday is quite difficult. Allow yourself time off to recover from your work. Don't be disappointed with yourself if you don't get everything done exactly according to plan. If you get very much behind, it's a good idea to take a moment to review your plan and draw conclusions. Falling behind may mean that you've made unrealistic plans. Also, structured procrastination. I do all kinds of less-important things on my to-do list to avoid the one major thing I'm dreading. Sometimes it's how I get anything done for some weeks. ETA: crossing items off (multiple) lists can be extremely satisfying.. I've recently started using workflowy to organize my lists, and I absolutely love it!

If you're friendly with your recommenders, ask them what reminder system works for them. Some will want you to remind them periodically, some will be on top of things and not want your extra email in their inbox. If you're unsure, a polite email like was suggested in several posts above will do the trick. I'd go for 2 weeks for before the deadline, then if you get no reply and no letter is submitted, a week before the deadline and the day before. As part of the reminder, to ease your mind, ask your recommender to acknowledge that they still intend to write the letter - otherwise you might be left wondering whether or not your email was received and whether your recommender is still on board with writing the letter. Do this 2 weeks before the deadline so that if something comes up, you still have time to find a replacement before it's too late.

Given your description of your advisor's ethics, I think it's a bit beside the point to debate whether or not she's appropriately accessible. It sounds like you should find yourself another advisor whose ethics you agree with. If you can find someone within your department, that's the easiest thing to do since it will not require re-applying to graduate schools. I'd start there, if possible. Additionally, your current situation may also be worth talking about with more advanced students, if there are any that you trust and respect and work with your current advisor. Maybe they can illuminate a side of your advisor's behavior that you are misunderstanding. As it stands, I'm sure that your opinion of her behavior in this regard is coloring how you think about her in general and it'll be good to clarify what is going on so you can make your decisions based on accurate information.

Here's an uneducated guess: There is no official policy at Columbia. There is probably no official policy in each individual department at Columbia, but if they existed they would not necessarily be the same across departments. Each professor probably has his/her own grading policy. Are you worried about the "value" of your A+? Stop worrying. An A+ is a great grade, any way you look at it. Besides, grades aren't that important in graduate school anyway.

It might depend on the field. In my field normally you don't need to apply separately, if you're accepted you are required to do TA/RA work as part of your funding package. These things are always stated clearly on the department website.

I suppose it would depend on what the problems were that got you in trouble in the first place. If they had to to with developing original work and presenting it, then maybe. It's at least a start, though I assume it's not going to be a very prestigious conference. If your professors think your work doesn't reach a high enough level for a third-year graduate student then going to a small student conference might just reinforce that opinion and do you more harm than good. If the problem is with writing things up in a satisfactory way, then this presentation probably won't help at all but will also not hurt.

I've never heard of a similar story; but taking it at face value, since they didn't outright kick you out of the program, lets assume they still think you have a chance. However, it sounds like they are not terribly interested in investing in you and are expecting you to either float or sink on your own. What have you been doing this year to improve your writing skills, and how successful have you been? The answer to those questions will be important in deciding what to do next. My guess is that if you manage to pick yourself up and get into the pace you're supposed to be in for next year, you'll be able to rejoin the program and do well in it. I gather from your post that you were told as much when you left. However, because of your background, you're always going to have to prove yourself even more than other students and work twice as hard. The point of giving you time off is to have you work your way up to the level you should be in in your third year, so that's what you should be working towards. As some point in the future, once you've made significant demonstratable progress with your writing and whatever other issues were problematic, you should contact your advisor again to talk about ways of getting back up to speed with research. Ask him to help you devise a plan to get you back on track to graduating in time. Depending on what you should be doing now (courses, quals, prospectus..), start thinking about what you need to do to pass that stage. Maybe start a research project you can be knowledgeable about by the time you go back to the program and have something written up about it? Mind you, how your program replies will be very instructive. If they think you have a chance and see that you are making an effort (and succeeding), they will hopefully give you another chance and work to help you get back on track. If they throw obstacles in your way despite your progress and are unwilling to help, then I think it'll be a not-so-subtle clue that maybe they think you're better off doing something else. At that point, you'll have to decide if you think it's worth fighting for - what kind of degree you'd get, what recommendations you'll have when you graduate and what chances you'll have of finding a job in your field. If what you're hearing is a polite 'no' instead of an encouraging 'yes', I think your best bet would be to leave that program since it will obviously not be a place that's interested in investing in you.

None of your business.

I think it's useful to view the SOP as a research proposal of sorts. Academics write lots of these during their careers. These are usually somewhat formulaic and formal, but normally still allow you to present your ideas in a way that gets your creativity across. So, no anecdotes or jokes, no stories of how you got into linguistics and how you've always loved learning languages. Concentrate on the present and the goals you have set yourself for the future. I have the feeling that your advisor's suggestions are right on the money and are not too formal, but then I haven't seen your essay so who knows.

I'd refrain from mentioning your relative in the SOP since that could backfire, but if your relative is willing to pull strings on your behalf by calling the department or whatnot I'd suggest trying that. Your relative must know how the academic world works so I believe they could approach this without offending anyone.

Glad to hear

Not that I was very different .. but there is so much waiting and uncertainty involved in the application process, waiting for test results and letters and transcripts and packets to arrive at schools, then waiting for status updates, interviews or decisions, then for visits, then making a decision where to go, then waiting for the new school year to begin so you can move to your new destination and start studying. I'm probably forgetting other things that happened too. ... So, if you can do it, you should learn to relax or you'll completely stress yourself out before grad school even starts.

First off, you should try and apply to more than one program. Also more than two. Chances of acceptance are low and both programs you listed are competitive. Which one is better regarded depends on what sub field you're in but at the end of the day you could do a great phd at either one. You can't really transfer in graduate school. If you want to get an MA from UT Austin and then move to UChicago you'll have to reapply just as you're doing now. No reason why UChicago would not accept you because your MA is from Austin, as I mentioned it's considered a good program.

Yes. Life happens. There are several more important ingredients to an application - research experience, a strong SOP, LORs, the writing sample. Even the overall GPA and GRE scores. If you are worried that the adcoms will see a worrisome pattern, spend a line in your SOP explaining it. The W alone won't be what keeps you out of grad school.

That's probably just fine. When I had to ask an overseas recommender for a letter I ended up getting a friend to buy local postage and I reimbursed my friend. If you don't have that option, I'm sure the prof will understand. Most likely they can use their university's post services so it won't cost them anything at all but even if it does, I'm sure they'll be willing to pay. You can offer to reimburse them if they'd like; it's a nice thing to do but I really doubt they'll take you up on that.

You need to be able to explain some specifics relating to your interests. It's a crucial part of determining fit. If you have no idea of what you want to do beyond "sociolinguistics" it's not going to be clear to an adcom at any university that they have potential advisors and resources that fit your needs. You don't need to go as far as proposing a project, but you should definitely mention 2-3 (related) ideas or interests.

Could you ask the supervisor if he would be able to write anything about your academic ability? On the face of it it sounds like the PhD camdidate could write the best letter but, of course, the problem is that a student can't really say much about another student's potential to succeed in a program and graduate on time, since they haven't even done that themselves. Is there a way to have someone else co-sign the letter with the student - e.g. their advisor/teaching supervisor/dept head, another instructor in the course, etc? That way you get all the benefits you described and also the advantage of experience behind your letter.

If the academic options involve a "did well in class" letter, go with the professor rather than the graduate student. If the work letter could say more than DWIC then go with that. DWIC is not very useful as a letter and doesn't say anything about you that's not already in your transcript.