fuzzylogician

Check with all the schools that they accept your scores; several schools I applied to required that the scores be no more than 2 years old. If the scores are accepted, then my guess is there shouldn't be any trouble with their being a bit older. If you're still concerned - the best way to get answers that are true for the schools you're applying to is to contact the departments directly and ask if it matters how old the scores are. If a department doesn't trust 3yr old scores, it can simply choose not to accept them--so I wouldn't worry overmuch in case they are accepted. But asking the department is the best policy.

Jae B, I'm sorry I am not going to have time to reply to everything you wrote today (and probably not until the weekend) but for now I just wanted to reply to your first sentence: "To clarify, not everyone here is aiming for a career in academia -- not anytime soon in my case, at least" -- yes, I'm sorry! I was writing a hasty reply from memory yesterday and what I meant to say was not that your post was about people who are aiming for a career in academia, but rather that the poster I was replying to, a history grad student, might want to be careful about interpreting the advice in the thread up to that point because it seemed to be geared more towards professionals. Sorry if that came out wrong!

hmm, I just took that quote to mean that the paper was written 10 years ago and didn't get to have a makeover before submission. In that case, the thing to do would be to rewrite it addressing current literature and thought. As I'd written, I assume this paper was chosen for a reason, namely that it was the best one the OP has to date. OP, if you think you can add new, maybe more mature and insightful, ideas - then I think you should go ahead and do that and not wait until the fall and hope that you get a good assignment that you can work into a writing sample. If you think the ideas in the paper aren't going to be enough, then perhaps it would be better to start over from scratch and write a new paper. In which case, again, I would advise you to at least start reading up on a topic and have a rough draft of your idea for the paper before the end of summer. As for proving to the committee that you can do grad level work - I assume that you are going to mention your new grad courses in your sop. Maybe adding a line about rewriting/expanding your writing sample during the summer and fall could solve that difficulty. The committee should know that the quality of the work you do over the summer and the work you do in the first two months of grad school are comparable.

Hence "bet," not "know." But there are reasons for me to think what I do, I didn't just say "you're wrong." I agree, but I think that this thread has gone off in two different directions. The way I understood the original post, the question was about joining on-campus clubs, not about volunteering for charity events, and that is what my posts above address. As for doing actual volunteer work, that is admirable and may well help build ties with the community at large, but I wonder how effect it is to put such information on one's CV and how it might contribute to getting an academic job. I still think that there are better ways of investing one's time if that is the only purpose. Personally I don't think I will put that kind of volunteer experience on my job application for assistant professor anyway, and I don't think that that is what is meant by "service and leadership." I will, however, mention volunteering to organize conferences, running my department's publishing endeavor, sitting on planning committees and whatnot. When it comes to volunteering for whatever cause I believe in, I just don't do that sort of thing so it can go on my CV, so I fail to see the connection. Maybe it should go on there, I don't know. Any kind of service like that can obviously only help, not hurt, but I still would rather keep those things I do in my spare time separate from my academic activities.

I'm willing to bet money that in this context "service and leadership" means sitting on committees, organizing workshops/conferences, creating events, taking on responsibilities such as proceedings editing, reviewing for major conferences and journals, sharing the burden for any other departmental activity (e.g. being student rep, organizing the departmental colloquium series, etc) and any other activity that contributes to the smooth running of the department. I seriously doubt that getting involved in Fantasy Games Club or even Feed The Poor Club will help.

For non-professional degrees which are aimed at academic careers I would imagine that on-campus orgs aren't going to be the most exciting on one's CV, if they make it in at all. If you're looking for the best way to boost your CV, stick to presenting and publishing papers. But then, if you're also looking to have a life outside work and you want to have fun with like-minded company, then on-campus organizations might be worth your time.

For the writing sample: the easiest thing to do is probably to improving on the sample you submitted last year, which I suppose you chose because it is your best work to date. Have one or more professors read and comment on it, and incorporate the comments into the paper. If you feel that you can approach your new professors, that could be a good indication of your seriousness and would help if/when you ask them for a recommendation. You might also want to completely rewrite parts of the paper to reflect your current writing style. Another option is to choose a new topic and start a new paper from scratch. I would only suggest that if you have support of the kind I described above - a professor should read this paper and comment on it, so you know what quality paper you have before you submit. If that's possible, then working on a new paper over the summer in tandem with one of your new professors could be a great way to show you are serious about the work, and have done it recently with good results. In any case, I wouldn't suggest waiting until the fall semester to start working on a paper for one of the courses you're planning to take since that will create an unnecessary time constraint. As for letters, I'd suggest keeping the original three papers you had last year, which you say are all strong, and adding a fourth supporting letter from one of the new profs. As far as I know, you should be able to resubmit the same letters.

In my department we write two "Generals Papers", basically two large-ish papers in two different sub-disciplines in the field, instead of having a comprehensive exam. What we've been told is this: don't over think it, don't worry too much. The papers don't have to be publishable when you submit them (though of course your advisor won't let you defend before you meet a certain standard). The main goal is to get them over with and move on to the dissertation. So I reiterate what mudlark said - what matters is the dissertation, not the grade you get in the comps.

If they're averaging 770-780 that means that they accept some people with 800, and others with 750-760. So yes, it's a bit below the average but I don't think it's anything to worry about. It'd be much wiser to spend your time working on other parts of your application, like your SOP or writing sample (if you need one), than on retaking the gre. The gain from retaking the test can't be that large compared to the gain from improving those other parts.

Yes, of course you should mention it. It's too bad you can't get a recommendation letter out of that experience, but there is absolutely no rule that says you have to have every experience you talk about backed up by a letter. If the school won't just take your word on these things, that is a problem all its own. But if you can talk about the specifics of your work there, why should anyone not believe you?

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTc4NzcyNDU5 My hard drive just died last week -- everything on it was lost and could not be recovered. I can't stress enough how important it is to back up all your valuable information!!

I am no immigration expert, so this is based only on common sense: 1)There are obvious advantages to the US degree you are going to get, so why not just mention them: the school you've been accepted to is generally ranked very high in your field, it has suitable advisors for your particular subfield, and it will give you generous funding for 5 years. Those are all pretty convincing reasons to want to go back to the States. 2)I would say something along the lines of "that would be too bad because the most suitable advisors for me are at school X...I suppose I'll have to find other schools to apply to in Europe/Canada/home country/Other that will be able to fund me and have good mentors." 3)A sibling or parent aren't the same as a distant cousin, but I suppose in general having a relative living in the States puts you at a higher risk of emigrating there than someone whose entire family lives in their home country. But then there's not much you can do about it, so I wouldn't worry too much. As I wrote before, don't say anything to arouse the interviewer's suspicion (like any plans to stay in States after the degree) and you should be fine. Your only plan you should have right now is to obtain the best education you can and then go back home and get a job--and that's it.

I don't know if adding the students in different quarters is what you should be doing, but regardless I think that holding sessions and grading for 90 students a quarter is A LOT. I guess it depends on what you're actually expected to do every week; for me personally the one semester where I held sessions for 40 students [though I was only payed for 20 students], wrote and graded *long* weekly assignment and graded alone their ~30-essay-question-take-home-exam was enough to make me want to quit TAing altogether. [one 2-hour session, 4 hours attending lectures, 1 office hour, countless emails+meetings outside of office hours every week.] As for my current school, TAs for the general intro class usually have no more than 20 students in their sessions, and they usually only TA one session. Other classes have even smaller TA sessions. But then MIT is unusual in this sense, our undergraduate program is exceptionally small and even the intro course that can satisfy general education requirements isn't that large. Departments at larger public schools place a larger burden on their TAs.

It shouldn't be a problem as long as you were accepted to a reputable university. The interviewers only care about your funding sources and the university you were accepted to, and that's pretty much it. If you maintained good status throughout your previous stay in the States and did not overstay/work illegally/etc, you should be fine. The only thing to watch out for, since you've already spent some time in the States, is suspicion that you're planning to emigrate there on your F1 visa. Even if you are thinking about finding a job in the States and staying there after you graduate, don't say that to the interviewer. If asked what you're going to do after you graduate, just say you'll go back home and look for a job or some such. Remember that an F1 visa is not a dual-intent visa, which means that you shouldn't be thinking about emigrating on that visa. Of course, everybody understands that things can change - especially if you spend 4-5 years in the US during grad school - and people in the embassy know that. Just don't make the mistake of saying that that's your plan all along. Aside from this advice--which btw holds for everybody, not just for people who have spent time in the US before--everything should be quick and painless.

Both are probably not a good idea. What are you applying for? A good recommendation is one that can speak to your commitment to your field of interest, to your ability to do research - come up with interesting new ideas and develop them, your writing ability, your background in your field, etc. A language instructor can speak to your language-learning skills and your ability to do your homework assignment (write, read, speak the target language) - those are all tools a researchers might need, but they are certainly not the only thing you want your recommendation to say about you. Anyway, if I had to choose one of those two, I'd go with the college professor who knows you longer. It'd be better if he also had a PhD and could say something general about your ability to successfully go through a graduate education.

Try cross-posting your question to the anthropology sub-forum as well. It doesn't look too active these days, but you might be able to get a few responses from anthropology students there. Look for the intro- and results- threads which I'm sure they must have had--those could be helpful to you even if no one is around the forum there right now.

I agree with the previous poster that this program sounds serious. I think you won first place with your offer, not second place:) I'd suggest that you talk with graduate students who are currently in the program. Ask them about the program's admissions policy and about the transition from MS to PhD. Grad students are usually very honest and don't have any reason to lie or omit facts, so you can count on what they tell you--especially if you hear it from several people. All you need to do is ask them how hard it is (or isn't) to move to the PhD program. As long as the program guarantees you funding for 5 years, provided you meet the academic requirements, I don't think you should be worried.

Downloaded and will try all of these out, thank you both! My personal favorite has a somewhat faster beat than the artists you mention - Ulrich Schnauss (in particular, Far Away Trains Passing By).

You have to know your own study habits. It takes some time, but once you've understood what works best for you, you can tailor your studying to fit that pattern. Here is what works for me: - I never work at home, there are just too many temptations there. So, either I go to the office, or to a coffee shop, or I sit in a park or at the riverbank. - If possible, I disconnect from the internet. - If I'm in a noisy place and can't concentrate I put on headphones with some work-music: monotonic, wordless, not too loud (jazz, instrumental, classical). - I work in the afternoons/evenings/nights, when I can concentrate the best. - I arrange to have snacks, water and coffee at my desk so there's no excuse to get up and go to the kitchen. - I try to decide on scheduled breaks. It works best for me to have short work-sessions and short breaks. e.g. 15 mins work, 5 mins break. - If I'm concentrated and on a roll, I don't stop for my scheduled break. If, however, I'm really not being productive, I quit for a longer while and return to work later. - I break up the work to small bits and set realistic goals, so I'm never faced with a huge ominous task. - I make up deadlines for each bit for some time before the actual deadline. I keep those deadlines. - I take the time to make a large to-do list on a whiteboard at my desk every week. I cross off every task I've performed; it's very fulfilling to see crossed-off lines. - I sometimes work in small groups with like-minded grad students who also need someone to watch that they're not wasting time surfing the internet. - ...and I embrace my procrastination. It's unavoidable. I'm happy if I can just manage it. - When the deadline is over: I celebrate my success, and if possible - take some time off. For larger projects, for me it's all about getting started. That is much easier to do if I break the project down to small parts and start with something easy, just so I have something already written. I always start by writing an intro that details what I plan to do (which always gets completely rewritten by the time I finish the work), and an outline of the sections+subsections I plan to have in my paper. I write down a rough summary of the results I want to report in the paper and move on to the lit review. That way I have a few pages written down before I get to the hard parts. If I'm having a bad day, a realistic goal can even be "write one page today!!," it depends on the work load and deadlines. But if that's my goal for the day then I (try to) do it, no matter how much time I spend on forums and blogs in between.

I don't know anything about the particular schools you asked about, but 810 is pretty low and there is a real chance that it won't get you past initial cutoffs. Only if you get past those is there a chance that someone might see your research experience, get interested and make an exception on your behalf; and even then there are sometimes sweeping cutoffs that the grad school poses and you could get disqualified even if the department does want you. Bottom line: if you have the time, study hard and retake the test. Concentrate first on getting your math score up, that should be easier for a microbiology major. The verbal section is harder but there are strategies for getting a higher score there as well.

Ask them to write the letter together. That way you'll get the reliable TA to actually write the letter and the renowned professor to sign it. If that's impossible: ask the professor, and talk to the TA about being a last-minute backup in case the professor flakes out (and in case you don't have a better backup).

This. The school will know who its competition is, and is entirely aware that people usually apply to more than one school. Pick 3-4 names that are in the same category as the school you're interviewing for or slightly better. The idea is to seem consistent about where you think you'll fit, so mention schools where there are professors who can supervise your doing similar work to what you suggested for this school, with a similar methodology, etc. Maybe it's also a good idea to end that list with "but your school is my top choice."

Well, it's hard to tell. These are all the things that will get you past cutoffs -- but they are not what is going to get you in. It sounds like you're doing OK in this category. Here are the things that matter. It is usually the recs, experience, sop and writing sample will get you into a school. Writing a good SOP is hard work and is not just (or mainly) about being a good writer. It's about taking some serious time to reflect and decide what topic interest you; being able to formulate a reasonable research question you are interested in and will show that you understand where your field stand and what would be a good-sized project that will contribute to the knowledge in your field; convincingly arguing that you have the background to do this project, and that you chose the right school in which to carry the project out (showing that you 'fit'). You didn't write about your writing sample, but is some fields that is a very important part of the application packet. If you don't have one yet, spend the summer/fall working on a paper which ideally presents a well-contained and argued-for argument on some topic relevant to your grad school interests. One small research project may (or may not) be enough...are you also writing a seniors thesis? If not, consider writing one, or doing some kind of independent study with a professor of your choice. You don't have to have a publishable product at the end, what's important is having the experience doing actual research so the university knows you have a fair idea of what is going to be involved in a graduate education and that you've invested in at least one long-term serious project. Recs: also a major issue. You want at least two of your three recs to be glowing. The third can be just "OK." Again, a thesis, RAship or independent study are all good places to impress profs. Otherwise, be sure to enroll in a small seminar and start making an impression early in the semester so you can get a decent letter by its end. You still have time to boost you application in many ways. If you do these things....then yes, you have a fair shot.

It's not as simple as Yes or No. You need to take a step back and ask yourself if you're willing to spend two years doing another undergrad degree and only then apply to grad school, and take into account that you may not succeed the first time or even the second time. What are your goals? You wrote your dream was to get into a top tier grad school--but what for? A degree is not a goal, it's a means to achieve a goal. So what is it, a career in CS? in research? in the private sector? in academia? Can you achieve your goals if you stay at your current tier-4 school? Could you find the middle ground and achieve them at a tier-2 university? Only you know the answers to these questions. My point is this: I'm an optimist. I believe that with hard work and devotion, you can achieve your goals. Or, at least, you shouldn't give up on something you want badly enough without trying. But you have to want it badly enough, and be willing to sacrifice for your goals. It's entirely legitimate not to want to do the work that is associated with a goal, you just need to do some soul searching and decide. If you decide you do want to pursue your dream, then make a plan of how to do it--basically kick ass in class, impress profs and get research experience--and give it your best try. It is not easy, it'll take some time, but it's not impossible. One thing is possible, though, is that you may have to revise your plans and goals according to the progress you make during that second undergrad degree. If the only thing that can ever satisfy you is getting into one of those top 3 schools you mentioned, that might not happen right away, or ever. But if you can be happy at school #10 or #15 on list and still get what you're after, then you should have a better chance of getting there. Again, you need to decide how flexible you want to be, and what you really need to do to go where you want to go.

I come from an entirely different field so this may not be helpful, but what candidates with MAs bring to the table in my field is experience working on an elaborate project over the course of 1-2 years. These are usually projects that with some work (or not) can be publishable, and are genuine contributions to the field. In addition, in a Masters degree you usually get to work more closely with professors, so you can have better recommendation letters. In some cases you get to be someone's RA or you get to TA, so that also goes on your CV. And you do more specialized courses and gain more experience than someone who is fresh out of college. All of these things help you narrow down what your interests are; you can base you choice of field on more than just "I took a class and liked it." Grad schools like that, because it means you have much better chances of doing well in a program and finishing it on time.