fuzzylogician

You learn how your body and mind work. I am a night person, there is not much that I can do early in the morning but for some reason I can do some effective writing for short periods at that time. Noon and early afternoon are pretty much useless for me but I can do first pass / non-technical reading of papers to decide what I need to return to and whether or not I need to learn the details in those papers, and I can do first pass grading (looking at solutions to get a general impression). Statistics and programming I do in the early evening hours. I do my best writing at night. I just plan according to the time of day and what I can reasonably expect to accomplish. I also accept periods of less productivity as a natural part of my work. I go back to old seminal papers that I haven't read in a while and try to get inspired, or if possible I just take time off. I'm involved in enough diverse projects that I always have something new to think about if I'm stuck somewhere else.

My program goes from being extremely structured in the first year to being quite unstructured starting in the second year. Almost everyone is confused at first and, in fact, falling behind is a serious concern among the faculty in my department (I'm the student rep. so I can tell you it's frequently discussed at faculty meetings). We have deadlines but they are rarely met. Personally I'm quite good at meeting deadlines - real ones and fake ones. Right now I am the only person in my program who is on schedule (though eventually everyone graduates on time and we have a great placement record). I have short-term and long-term goals which I set in the beginning of the semester. I keep a weekly to-do list, which I update based on my progress, and a semester/~6-month list of all the deadlines I need to meet, divided by date and by topic (abstracts, papers, class presentations, teaching, etc). I usually try to break up large projects into daily-to-weekly assignments which are easily manageable. I wouldn't just set a vague deadline in February because that would make it hard for me to handle. I need to have a clearer picture of the amount of work that needs to be done so that I can spread the load in a more reasonable way. Working last-minute up against a deadline is something that doesn't work well for me, for personal reasons. I sometimes don't feel very well so I can't just wait until the last minute and then cram all the work into a short period of time. Friends often make fun of just how organized I have to be (I write everything down that I need to do, no matter how small, and without my calendar I couldn't tell you where I am going to be tomorrow), but eventually it helps me get more done, I think.

So if I understood correctly, you don't have many options and you don't like any of the ones you have. Changing advisors within your school will allow you to graduate in two years, assuming that you find a new advisor and everything goes smoothly -- but that's not guaranteed. Starting over will take at least four more years and I agree does not seem to make much sense, given your background. So it would appear that the best course of action is to make things work where you are. Is your advisor aware of your unhappiness? One of the main problems you describe is independent access to the equipment. Can you do whatever training is necessary to be allowed to handle the equipment yourself? Being forced to rigorously plan experiments and then having some of them scrapped doesn't sound unreasonable to me; if you think that your experiments have merit and should be run, do you try and defend the ideas? Being an experimentalist doesn't mean you don't need to think about the theoretical merit of your work, rather you should be able to justify your experiments based on the theories. Your advisor doesn't sound wholly unmanageable to me; maybe you could learn to deal with him better? Is there anyone in your group who is successfully working with him who you could seek advice from?

In the proof-of-existence department, I didn't contact any POIs before or after submitting my apps and still did pretty well in my application cycle. More generally, it's crucial to contact POIs in fields where the student joins a lab or working group mentored by a certain PI, who in turn directly funds the student. In all the linguistics programs I know, students are funded collectively by the department and not from particular advisors' grants. As such, you don't need to have someone in particular to sponsor you before you even apply. Nonetheless students still have a particular set of POIs in mind who they would like to work with at each school. If you find that one or more are not accepting new students or are leaving, you might reconsider applying there in the first place. That's one main goal of contacting POIs, in my mind, though normally faculty won't tell you that they are leaving before it's already become public knowledge - so there may be other more efficient ways of learning about possible leaves or transfers. Another goal is to try and make a memorable (positive) impression on faculty who are hopefully on the adcom and can influence decisions. That would of course be a positive outcome, but I don't think it's necessary. In linguistics, to the best of my knowledge, the field is still small enough that every application that is submitted receives some level of attention. None are tossed without being given some considerations like in larger fields that get hundreds of apps per year and therefore have strict cutoffs. If you have a strong application, you can do very well without having contacted anyone. My advice regarding contacting POIs after being admitted to a program changes considerably -- then I encourage as much communication as possible. But I believe that that is not what the question is about, so I won't elaborate.

Given that you only have one day to decide, academic probation and funding concerns trump possibly looking bad. If it is truly the case that this class could seriously hurt you and it's not a required class, I'd say you have no choice but to drop it. You can study the language independently of class if you need it for your research or you can retake the class in the future, maybe after getting help in understanding what is making you struggle now.

I wouldn't memorize the whole talk. I think talks are much better when the speaker doesn't "stick to a script". Personally what matters to me is that I have a good plan for the first couple of slides - getting myself past the introduction and into the first slide of actual content. Once I'm there, I feel more comfortable and have a flow going. At that point, it doesn't really matter if the talk doesn't proceed word-for-word exactly as I planned it, as long as I know where I'm going and am keeping track of the time. If that is the case for you, and it sounds like it is, then I wouldn't worry about it. I think it's much better to have a natural speech-style delivery of the talk than one that is too precise and planned. Practicing more would probably help reduce the amount of misspeaking and bad-transition incidents and I still find it helpful--though time consuming--to write a full script for my talk, even though I don't follow it precisely, but beyond that if your talks are getting the point across in a reasonable way and within time, I would say you're doing fine.

Professors do get payed (though not "a ton of money") and writing letters is part of the job. But they don't have to write a letter to just anyone who asks, they have to believe that they can honestly endorse the student's application. I would try to follow up with another email to both of the professors who haven't replied, or better yet if you can do it, try and stop by their office for a quick chat. Try to find out whether they just forgot or are too busy or whether they are trying to let you down easy. As emmm says, you don't want a weak letter that could hurt you.

Unless you tell me that Engineering is very different from Math, from my experience with Math assignments you could get one of two kinds of comments (well, three): you could be completely right and not make a mistake; you could have made a small error in the calculation (e.g. the ones Aaron mentioned) but otherwise have had the right idea in mind; or you could have been completely off track and not at all on your way to a correct solution. Two out of three of those comment-types may--arguably--not contain too much useful information, but the third kind does. How do you know you didn't get any of those unless you actually look at the comments you got on your assignment?

Get over your self-important/self-pitying attitude. How many times can you possibly mention being "attacked" or "ragged on" for maintaining your "pure, truth-seeking" mentality in the face of all us heathens insisting that the earth is flat? It's simply impossible to convince you that something is wrong--for some reason the many smart people who have taken the time to thoughtfully respond to your posts and offer advice turn into a bloodthirsty mob which must be ignored whenever they suggest something that is not to your liking. Your refusal to accept subtle criticism (or the appearance of this state of affairs) is what has prompted some of the more blatant posts in this thread. As for me, if you find some of my posts rude, well, tough. There is a whole other thread devoted to giving you advice on how to improve your research skills. This one has turned into more of a discussion of your communication skills, and contains many helpful suggestions that I hope you will take to heart. My only goal here is to point out failures in communication that can make your life unnecessarily difficult. This is so not only in the political world of academia, it holds wherever people communicate -- for example, in the corporate world. You very simply need to stop with the victim mentality, you can't believe how petty and childish it makes you sound. So yes, this has turned into more than just a discussion of whether or not it's legitimate not to pick up assignments or to have a learning-technique that's different from the norm (whatever that is). Of course it is! Others have expressed these opinions before, leading to interesting discussions about learning styles, the role of TAs etc. It's not the opinion per se and it's not the mere sighting of your name on a post that provoked the responses that you got on this thread. Hint: it's something about the delivery. </15th attempt at making the same point>

I don't know if this is a genuine post or a sarcastic one. But regardless, let me say something more productive and that may be of more interest to other readers as well. I am a linguist. In fact, my research centers around the area of sentence meaning (or semantics). Word choices (or lexical semantics) is an interesting field onto itself but it's outside my area of expertise so I won't comment on it any further. Logical entailments from sentences are also truly(!) fascinating. But beyond them there are other aspects of meaning that deserve attention as well -- and that is studied in the fields of pragmatics and discourse. Sentences can have presuppositions and (defeasible) implicatures. For example, if I tell you that I solved most of the problems on the quiz you are licensed to draw the conclusion that I didn't solve all of the problems correctly, even though my statement is entirely consistent with that state of affairs. Likewise, if I tell you that I have two brothers, you are licensed to infer that I have *exactly* two brothers, even though my statement is consistent with my having three or more brothers. Singular definite descriptions like "the president" presuppose the existence of a unique referent that they can pick out in the discourse. That's why "the king of France is bald" is a weird sentence - not true but not quite false, it's infelicitous (there is no king of France) and likewise "you have to read the other thread on this board!" is strange (there is more than one other thread on the board). But if I told you sorry it took me so long to reply, I had to go pick up my brother at the airport, listeners and readers seem happy to accommodate the fact that I have a brother (possibly more than one, in fact) without protest even if they didn't know this fact before. I can utter a generic statement like all owls hunt mice and you'll accept it as true even though what it entails is clearly false - there can be baby owls and very old owls that don't hunt at all, and sick owls or wounded owls - in fact, it can turn out that only half of all the owls hunt mice and you'll still think what I said was true. Similarly you'll agree that chicken lay eggs, even though it is at most true of half of all chickens even in the unlikely scenario that there are no exceptions among the hens, just because roosters don't lay any kind of egg at all. Speakers report that they perceive differences between the following pairs of sentences: a triangle has at least three sides and a triangle has more than two sides, and also a triangle has at most three sides and a triangle has less than four sides -- even though these pairs are truth-conditionally equivalent (=they are true in exactly the same cases), and true (=every triangle meets the description in all four sentences, according to the mathematical definition of a triangle). These differences, then, have something interesting to do with the form of the number-words that are used in these sentences. If I ask you can you pass the salt? or do you know what time it is?, you are being uncooperative if you just answer yes!. You understand very well that I want you to perform a certain action, even though my literal question was just yes/no. The point of this tangent, beside my fascination with my own research field, is this: your request that we address only the literal meaning of your words and their logical entailments, but not anything beyond (in your words, distrusting what you explicitly say in favor of assumptions that are based on our own personal experiences), amounts to nothing more than insisting that can you pass the salt must be answered with yes!, else we are over-interpreting and putting words in your mouth that you did not utter. Competent speakers of any natural language use it to convey much more than just literal meaning, and whats more--they expect cooperative conversation partners to understand more than just the literal meaning as well; it's simply an integral part of language use. But you insist that a triangle has at least three sides! -- it's mathematically true, your integrity forces you to defend this position and you expect others to ignore the form of your argument, even though they tell you that there is something wrong with this formulation and you'll get your point across much easier and clearer if you instead said that a triangle has more than two sides. Alas, we are not machines, and form does matter (happily for us, linguists!). Edit: this is my 1,500th post on this board...and I am very happy that it turned out this way, with a post that's mostly about interesting observations in my field and not about other petty things.

Sigh. I don't work for you and I don't have to address each of your points individually. Yes, I "admit" to caring about how arguments are delivered. Are really so naive that you believe that you can say whatever you want, however you want? That you speak The Truth and that you are therefore allowed to be as rude and condescending as you like with no consequence? Or is it not naivete but self-importance? Either way, it's not very appealing. I usually take care to write thoughtful replies to even highly suspicious posts when I believe that other board users could benefit from the conversation. Unfortunately, your accusations and your tone, as well as the very fact that you clearly do not intend to take what any of us write to heart, make this an unproductive endeavor. We are trying to tell you that you give off an unfavorable impression. We address not only direct quotations--and even when we do you find ways to twist what you said around and go back on clear statements--we tell you what we understand from what you write. You may not like it, but the proper reaction is not to deny everything and blame everyone else but to try and think why this is so. If one person tells you you're drunk, she may be wrong. But if ten different people who don't know each other tell you you're drunk, maybe you should go lay down. Lastly, I doubt it's integrity that makes you step on toes. Your mightier-than-thou attitude is not integrity, it's simply a refusal to play by the very basic social rules of academia and of adult life in general. The only person who will suffer is you.

Listen, I don't think it's worth my time or energy to reply to each of your points. You're clearly just not getting it. I will reply to the one place where you said that what I wrote was "untrue" and quote your earlier post (again): "Also, most of the time I knew what I was doing just as well as the TA anyway." I find that, and your general attitudes towards TAs, disrespectful, for the reasons that OH YEAH specified. One other general point: you now seem to express high(er) opinions of your professors, but still not of your peers. I don't know what kind of program you are in but I, at least, learn the most from my peers. My professors have the perspective and experience but my peers are the ones who I spend the most time with, and they are the ones who have fresh and exciting ideas. It would be a serious loss if I only interacted with my books and my professors and not with my peers. They are the ones who listen to my ideas that go no where, who help me out when I'm stuck, who read my drafts and comment on my (practice-)practice talks. They help me sort things in my head so that I can talk to my professors after having thought through my problems, and that way I can get better-targeted help from my professors. Your attitude is making it impossible for you to make the most out of your graduate school experience, just because you value some people less than others. ---- I assure you: they can tell, and they do not appreciate it. Consider this, maybe, as my last contribution to this thread: this is not high school. There are no cliques and we are not out to get you, despite your rhetoric. Other posters have expressed opinion similar to your without being down-voted. Since--again--we have nothing against you, maybe it's time you considered that the way you express yourself is offensive to others. Your view that "everyone has to agree" here or that we are being "childish" is both wrong and unhelpful. Read other posts on this board and you'll find plenty of disagreement. But there are acceptable ways of expressing opinions in a society and there are less acceptable ways. If you consistently use less acceptable ways, don't be surprised if you get called out on it.

I believe that most (all?) applications require you to list all academic degrees and/or training that your have participated in. It's not a matter of whether or not you should list your other Masters -- you have to do so. Even if it's only optional (which is doubtful and should be confirmed with the schools you're applying to), a Maters degree that you describe as a "huge asset" sounds like something that you would want to report. Two Cs are not enough to cause serious alarm, especially if you have another degree in which you did very well. You've demonstrated that you can successfully take classes and complete a degree, so having another degree should make you even more attractive.

Let me help, then. This post: "Honestly, I never went to pick up graded anything. I felt like it is the TA or professors job to return graded assignments. It actually REALLY pisses me off when they tell us to "go pick it up". In undergrad, I had no clue where their office was, and wasn't about to spend precious study time figuring it out and picking up an old assignment, but I still want to know what grade I got! Usually someone would pick mine up for me though. Also, most of the time I knew what I was doing just as well as the TA anyway. Nevertheless, I personally love comments, as it means whoever graded it actually read it. I know I'm not in kindergarden, but I still like to see the "Good job!" on a 105/100 exam. :-)" is unhelpful. - It shows immaturity in that you are making excuses for not knowing thinks that should be obviously clear. I bet the course syllabus lists the professor and TA's office and that they would tell you if you emailed them and asked. - That you value your time above that of others and that you have your priorities all wrong. If you spend your entire time studying then there is something wrong with your study-techniques. You value your own learning skills more than the comments you might get from more experienced teachers on any assignment. If you can do it all yourself, why go to school in the first place? And if not, you may want to be more respectful of others' time and thoughts. Your attitude towards learning, as it emerges from this post, is completely counterproductive. - That you have a condescending attitude toward your teachers. You think you know more than they do and you don't have a high opinion of the time they spend reading your work and commenting on it. - And you unnecessarily bragged about your high grades. That didn't add anything substantive to the comment. So what have we learned from your post? You can do it all yourself, and the TAs waste your time. No wonder you got down-voted.

Non of these are particularly important. Personally I do specify computer skills on my CV but specifying hobbies and places traveled sounds completely out of place. I never saw any professor or graduate student in my field mention them so I wouldn't add them to my CV unless there was an explicit request to do so.

The OP mentioned "hints about alcohol" in tweets or FB, nothing about compromising photos. Those are a whole other matter; people should worry more about publishing silly photos of themselves that can be abused, in general. Anything that is online is there forever, many people tend to forget that.

I don't think that adcoms will reject you just because they googled your name and learned that you sometimes go out with friends and drink. That by itself is no reason to suspect a bad fit or inappropriate behavior. However, it is important to be conscious of the public image that your online activities project. Assume that anything and everything you post on the internet will be accessible to future employers. Don't post anything that could potentially cause you damage in the future. Limit access to your profiles and delete everything that might be harmful.

Why not just ask the school if what you have is acceptable? They know their rules much better than we do.

In that case, don't wait any longer. Ask someone else on Monday.

Email her anyway and hope for the best. Even if she is away chances are she still has internet access. Options for more active lurking: ask your department's secretary or her current advisees if they know if/when she will be in her office, or check if she updates talks,etc. on her website. That may give you some indication as to her whereabouts. Wait at least a week--possibly longer, depending on when your deadlines are--before you give up and ask the other professor for a letter.

Easier said than done, yet a required skill in academia. As a researcher you often have to summarize your work e.g. in 100 words for an abstract in the beginning of a paper, or in 500 word for a conference abstract, or several one-sentence punchlines for a (readable) poster, and so on. You also have to learn to synthesize the main take-away points from a paper in order to be able to teach it properly. Even very detailed papers usually have no more than 2-3 important main points, supported by a reasonable number of arguments. A thesis will also have an extensive lit review section; I am sure that one could distill a one-paragraph main point, although I understand that it may be difficult.

I always check the list hoping I didn't make it...but this month it's a sign of being too busy, not of not being busy enough, so I guess it's alright. [Does being almost ABD count? I've defended a second qualifying paper so after this semester I will only have one class (and one dissertation) left!!]

Instead of a front cover and table of contents, I would suggest using a cover sheet that briefly describes the content of the other chapters of the paper, the main argument(s) that are made there, and an explanation of how the chapter you are submitting fits into that. An abstract of sorts for the thesis as a whole and this chapter in particular.

The best I could do for a similar issue was have a local friend print the PDF I got from the university on official letterhead, get official envelopes and beg one of the secretaries at the program I was registered at to sign the seals after she confirmed that the "transcripts" corresponded to the "original" they emailed me. Then my friend sent me all the transcripts in a big envelope and I mailed them to the universities myself together with the rest of my hard-cope materials. Convoluted, but it worked.

Any chance of getting your boss to revise her letter? Tell her specifically what you had expected to find in the letter and emphasize that these traits/strengths are such that only she could attest to them. If she is trying to help and acknowledges that she doesn't have a lot of experience writing letters, she might agree to do this. If so, this time provide her with either a draft of a letter or just a list of things you hope will make it into the letter. She can then use this information and choose to write about those parts that she endorses as correctly characterizing you as a student/employee. If this is not an option and you think you have someone who could write you a better letter, I'd go ahead and do that. I'm not at all sure that it's possible to remove recommenders who you have added to your application--at least not in every app--so this is something to check. In addition, if schools allow a supplemental letter beyond what is required it may be wiser to just add a letter without removing this one, assuming that it doesn't say anything that could actually hurt you. ETA: this is, of course, assuming you had permission to read your letter.