fuzzylogician

My personal computer is a Lenovo laptop, and I have a desktop at home. I generally prefer the PC to the mac, so I am very happy with this arrangement. In the lab we use iMacs. I do most of my stats work on the Mac just becase the large screen helps a lot, but there is nothing I can't do on my pc as well. Some software we use (e.g. E-Prime) can only be used on PCs so we have a special partition on our macs. I don't know any linguistic software that only runs on the mac, so that could be a consideration. On the other hand, many of our faculty have macs and they do just fine -- so I think any choice will probably be good and you can defer to the usual considerations of mac-vs.-pc. Linguistics is handout-heavy. In classes I usually take notes on the handout itself. For meetings, I have a legal pad and I take my iPad as well, and use both depending on the situation. For quick sketches and notes I use pen and paper, but it's good to have access to my stuff on dropbox via the iPad. At the end of each semester I scan EVERY piece of paper that I have and I file everything away. These things are surprisingly useful - you can't imagine how many times I search for notes from a meeting weeks/months ago where we worked out a design for an experiment that fell through and is now resurrected, for exampe.

It depends on the year but people do get off the wait list.

What are the funding packages for each school? Did you get along better with professors at one school vs. the other? What kind of project will you be doing at each school? Does the program at one or the other school offer more relevant courses? More research opportunities? More travel funding? Internship options? Collaborations? Libraries, labs and other resources? Does one have more relevant faculty than the other, who could serve on your dissertation committee or who do relevant work? What is the placement record of both schools (both potential advisors)? What is the time-to-completion at both schools? Do you have a weather preference? How important is it to you to be near an international airport? Details.

It was a very emotional process at the time. Every time you say 'no' you are choosing to close the door on a different future you could have had, and are letting go of an accomplishment that you worked very hard for. Especially with the schools I was seriously considering, but not just, I would wait a day or two after making my decision to make sure I didn't regret it. Hitting that 'send' button on this kind of email was still difficult -- my heard would skip a beat each time, even though I was very sure of what I was doing -- so I'm not trying to make this seem like an easy thing. But if you think about it logically, I think you know it's the right thing to do. Maybe it's naive but I believe in this sort of karma. I got everything I wanted out of my application process and I maybe can help someone else do better in theirs. I like to think that, even if it's wrong.

This is unnecessary. In a small field, it could hurt you if it got out that you already accepted another offer but still had schools waste time and money on your decision. It's much better to withdraw and let the school make offers to students who might accept them. In some cases, spots and/or funding that has been offered to one student can't be reoffered to another student, or at least the process isn't automatic. People might be rejected or put on the waiting list who would have otherwise gotten an offer. You want to be responsible for that outcome just so you can know what some school that is not your top choice and which you are definitely not attending will decide? FWIW I withdrew my app from three schools after I had offers from my top 3 choices, before even making a decision. At that point I knew for a fact that I wouldn't go to those other schools and it would have been a waste to let them go through the decision process only for me to say 'no' at the end. Now I'm attending my top choice and am very happy with my decision, I've never once had a 'what-if' thought of this nature. Who cares?

If you're not sure, go and visit. It's not uncommon for people's opinions to change following visits - you might find you get along better with the professors and students, that you like the city, that the opportunities are better. I say it's worth your time and money to be sure before you make a decision that will commit you to a certain school for the next 5-7 years and will shape your entire academic future. It's not silly at all.

Re: visit or no visit, I think the visit is important. You may know the town but it doesn't sound like you know the workings of the department. You also can't be sure that you'll get along with your potential advisor and current grad students. If you feel uncomfortable, your life will be difficult (visit the current grads forums and search for "I hate my advisor" and "I hate my classmates" threads). My opinions of schools definitely changed following visits, after I realized that some people who I thought I would want to work with aren't people I am likely to get along with, and similarly the social atmosphere at those schools factored into my decision in ways I didn't predict. Re: open house vs. independent visit: the open house allows you to see how the department interacts in social events in a way that a private visit probably will not. These events tend to include some dinner and/or party and you can see if the students talk to each other and to professors, - i.e. if there are closed quiet groups or if people move from group to group and talk to many people. On the other hand, the open house is set to impress you and things won't usually be as festive. If you visit at another time, you'll get more of a feel for how the department operates on a day-to-day basis. I'd visit during the open house if possible beacuse it allows you to meet your potential cohort and that can be a big factor in your decision, but any visit is better than none, in my opinion.

Ask the school, we might be able to provide anecdotes but we don't know what is the policy of the schools you are interested in. Best guess: it's uncommon and there might be difficulties but maybe you can work something out, especially if you don't mind hanging out unofficially. Otherwise, you want the school to pay your tuition over the summer, where many schools don't even do that for their current students, and there will probably be administrative headache involved in making you an official student at an extraordinary time. It doesn't hurt to ask, however.

What is the role of this "interim" advisor? In my program students are assigned a temporary advisor for their first year who may not work in their field at all but only fulfills the function of signing papers and making sure the students are doing ok (all our first-year classes are mandatory, so this is mostly a beaurocratic matter). Students are distributed among professors in a way that equalizes their workload and not necessarily according to a match in interests. After the first year students may switch advisors and choose someone with a better research match, but in our program even then people might work with Prof A but continue to have as the official academic advisor who signs their papers Prof B. It's not particularly important who the official advisor is, and there is no obligation to work only (or at all) with that person. Of course, if they are completely outside your field of expertise they may have a hard time advising you on classes and such like, which may be a reason to switch. They will then probably know this themselves and will not be offended in any way. What you need to know is what status this advisor is fulfilling? How common is it to have one official advisor and someone else as the main person you work with? Ask the department but also the students how often people change advisors, and whether that introduces difficulties into working relationships. In my program no one is particularly offended if a student who mostly works with A also wants A as the official academic advisor. If it's the same in your prospective program, I'd say this issue is not a problem.

Did you get a funding offer along with your acceptance? I don't remember any of the offers I got saying anything about a deposit but all of them came with full funding from the departments so I wasn't expected to pay anything to begin with. (if the answer is 'no', might I caution you against doing an unfunded PhD? In the vast majority of cases, it's not worth the investment).

Mentioning the acceptance shouldn't hurt your chances unless you say that you're definitely going to that other school. I wouldn't lead with that topic but if it comes up during the interview, I don't think you need to worry about saying where else you applied and how your decisions are turning out. If you're a strong candidate, schools know that you'll probably have options and they can also guess their competition. Letting them know you're doing well (but emphasizing that you are excited about possibly attending the school that you are interviewing at!) only makes you look more serious.

It may depend on field but I usually use either the last name or full name (or even just first name, if it's someone both I and my conversation partner know). The fact that they teach at a university is not relevant to the discussion of their ideas.

Stay out of it, there is nothing to be gained by getting involved. This really didn't sound like a case of "critical knowledge not imparted", simply that Prof. Bob has a different expertise than your advisor and chooses to focus more on that. It's a perfectly legitimate decision and while you and your advisor may wish that more of the class focussed on your work, or even that Prof. Bob should know more about said work, it's time you realized that not everyone is an expert in every field - even if their colleague is a pioneer in that field. You've done your part in trying to educate Prof. Bob and your classmates; the department should have access to a syllabus for this class so they should be able to know what is being taught; and different professors choose to emphasize different things even if it's technically the same class. If your advisor is unhappy with the choice of replacement for his class, let him fight that battle. You really don't want to be the source of information about Bob's performance. I don't see how there is any advantage to doing so. If you really think that there is critical information that is left out or is being distorted, only then should you consider saying something.

I don't see how "knowing what he/she is talking about" has anything to do with "foreign speakers presenting on their colleagues' behalf". That just sounds like plain intolerance to me.

Huh. First names seem to be the baseline assumption as far as how to address students in my field, and I like it that there is no unnecessary formality.

- Make sure you dress nicely, even if there is no camera, just to get in the right mood. - If there is a camera: make sure the background behind you is respectable. Test with a friend ahead of time. - Just like in any other interview, you can prepare yourself a list of questions you expect you might be asked along with keywords you would like to mention in your replies, as well as some questions for when they ask 'do you have any questions?'. - Relax and have fun.

Yeah, I would count that as social unawareness and claim that that is most definitely not a sign that you should not be getting a PhD. Evidence: I, and all my friends, who are still here.

When: as soon as you decide you're not accepting the offer. How: short polite email is enough. Keep it professional. Who: DGS/POI or whoever made the official offer. Possibly anyone else who you interviewed with and who you would like to maintain professional relations with.

Do you want to do mostly research or mosly teaching after you graduate? If research is your main goal, pick the better advisor. If you're interested in getting mostly a teaching job, maybe you want to choose the school that provides teaching experience in the area you'd like to teach in.

Does "relatively new, up and coming" mean not tenured yet? If so, she should have a vested interest in setting the record straight, and her career could get hurt if it's not and you complain to the dean. As ktel says, you need to play things right in order to not burn any bridges. You want to improve your situation but if you cause damage to a successful academic's career by not following the necessary steps to correct whatever is wrong, people will remember that. Start by having a conversation with her about her advising style. Tell her it hurts your confidence when she tears down a second draft after saying good things about the first. You might find out that she thinks she is doing everything right and helping you to improve your work, not hurting you in any way. If the situation continues, seek help first within your department: approach the DGS or the department head. Only if that doesn't work should you take this matter outside your department.

In that case, I go back to saying that you just need to stay away from these people, and now I can also empathize. My program is nothing like this, but that sounds highly dysfunctional. In my program almost everyone wants to get position in leading research universities to I think the attitude to service might be different than in yours. But I agree, not everyone will appreciate others' efforts and if they never do the same, some will not even understand how much work is involved. For some things I do for others (this is more in research-team mode, not strictly speaking in helping out the department as a whole), I know my teammates appreciate my efforts, because they tell me so. I don't care whether they are just being polite or actually mean it. I also know my professors see my efforts and appreciate them, and at the end of the day that's what's going to matter when I apply for jobs.

Fascinating. I'm one of those people who ends up doing more than others because, as you say, not everybody contributes equally to the department's communal needs. I don't resent anybody's choice to prioritize differently than I do and, say, spend more time with their family, but I'd like to think that those people who do less at least appreciate it that someone else is picking up their slack. Your attitude towards the people who are doing more work because you chose to do less is remarkably ungrateful. If you were in my department, I wouldn't want to be your friend. From your end of things, you don't owe anything to anyone. You can continue to prioritize as you do and just avoid the people whose company you don't appreciate, but I find it hard to sympathize with you. Sorry.

Your situation is not uncommon and it's nothing to be worried about. Unless you already know you're going to accept the school's offer regardless of any other circumstances, feel free to go on visits to other schools. Acknowledge the offer you already received and let the school know that you'll notify them of your decision as soon as you can. They will not be surprised that their top applicants have several options to choose from. You can, but don't have to, tell the schools you are interviewing at that you received another offer. In my opinion there is nothing to lose by doing so, but I know some people feel uncomfortable. Normally I found that schools will simply concentrate on convincing me that their program is the best, and the rare occasions when someoen said something bad about another school that accepted me taught me important things as well (mostly, that that person was probably someone I don't want to work with. I don't like trash talking). Congrats on your acceptance and interviews, and good luck!

For what it's worth, my program (and I'm sure others as well) does routinely accept students with limited and even no background in linguistics. First-year students usually have less background in at least one of the three core areas, usually in semantics and sometimes in phonology - less often in syntax, and that gets sorted out in the first-year classes. In general, adcoms seem to be looking more for sharp minds that can form interesting questions - they'll worry about teaching you how to pursue the answers later. I think that what is making your lives more difficult is not simply your lack of formal training in linguistics but more acutely the need to establish that you have the necessary background to form coherent research interests that will sustain you through graduate school, lacking that formal education. Since you didn't take classes in formal linguistics (or took less of them, or a subset of what a major/minor would include), adcoms might assume that you are lacking fundamental knowledge about linguistics. The questions on adcom's minds will inevitably be - can this person succeed in our linguistics graduate program? do they know what they are getting themselves into? will they be able to come up with interesting questions and conduct meaningful research? A lot of time, money and effort are invested in every grad student who is accepted, and that will all go to waste if that person learns that linguistics isn't really their thing after all, and quits. If the adcom decides that the answer is Yes, you are a worthwhile investment, then you will get the training you need to go after your interests. It's less what you already know and more about the conviction that you'll be able to pick up what knowledge you're lacking (and importantly, be able to tell what that is). So, your SOPs need to be even more convincing, more precise and detailed than those of other applicants', whose backgrounds are enough to convince the adcom that they know/can know what are interesting questions in the field.

They may ask for transcripts, but grades are certainly not what will decide whether or not you will be hired for a tenure-track position. At this level you are judged by your research record (cv, publications, research statement, job talk), teaching ability (as reflected in evaluations, teaching statement, sample lecture - in case they ask you to give one) and personality (as reflected in interviews, meetings and such). Letters of recommendation are very important, as are the essays you write and the way you present yourself in the interview (if you get that far...). People are choosing a colleague who will potentially be down the hall from their office from now until they retire; I'd say the same advice applies here as when you apply to graduate school but probably even more forcefully - grades are one of the least important components of the application. Don't mess them up completely but don't worry overmuch.