fuzzylogician

Superstars tend to have more people want to work with them. They tend to travel and present more, maybe serve on more committees and overall have less free time. More people sit in on their classes so it's harder to get one-on-one time with them, especially as an undergrad. It can also be harder to impress them because they get to collaborate with all these brilliant people. At least that's been my experience with superstars. Sometimes it can be much easier to work closely with new faculty than with these very famous people, though you can still take some of their classes and maybe write them a paper, and then the question is - do you get the letter from the famous person who doesn't know you as well (because there were 50 other people taking her seminar) or from the less-known professor who you worked closely with and therefore knows you a lot better. I got letters from both and it worked out great for me, but if I had to choose I don't know what I would have done. There's no easy answer.

Is this for a research based program? I'm not sure it's advisable to submit a paper that contains little or no original work. You want to present a paper that argues some (new, original) point, not just reviews a point others have made.

I am not in your field so this is only general advice. Your GPA looks good. If you present it the right way, moving to the UK to pursue a higher degree is a clear sign of motivation and dedication to your studies. You have research, teaching and work experience, so I don't see why you think it's not enough to be admitted to a PhD program. At this stage of the game it's not about publications, it's more about the ability to produce ones - that is, conduct independent research that contributes to the field, and it seems you're well on your way to doing that. You can talk about your research and teaching experience and the skills they've taught you. Maybe also pick one of those work experiences you mentioned and talk about it, but don't force it into your SOP if it doesn't fit. The adcom will also see your CV, and you can put a short description of your duties and accomplishments there. Good luck on the GRE!

I swear this is the last time I post on this thread. But for the sake of anyone who's gotten this far - This is about risk management. This is not about what your professor, who you know and have a good relationship with, will think about your not waiving your rights. This is about what people you don't know sitting on an admissions committee for a school you really want to get into will think. We've established that you're not going to gain anything from not waiving your rights. I will also agree it's very unlikely that doing so will cause your application any damage. This is probably insignificant legalese schools are forced into putting on their applications. So, we're talking about a small chance that this decision will make any difference at all. But I've been around long enough to know that sh*t happens, even if it's unlikely, unfair or down right illogical. Would you rather this small chance go your way or the other way?

I think the SOP is a more appropriate place to mention this than the CV. After you're notified you've been accepted, if it's not too long after the deadlines, you can contact your schools and ask to send an amended CV that includes this conference presentation.

It depends on each department's culture. Check out their websites: if a department mentions collaboration as part of the its official description and has affiliated faculty from other departments listed on its faculty page, I think it's safe to mention them (and perhaps others) yourself. As others have said, they shouldn't be the main reason you're applying, so don't talk about them too much. On the other hand, if a department doesn't say anything about collaborations, when you look at professors' publications there's nothing coauthored and the faculty page doesn't list affiliated faculty, then I wouldn't mention professors from other departments. It could signal to the department that you don't understand its culture and are looking to do things it doesn't normally allow.

That's good news! Did you tell your professor you are thinking about using this paper as a WS? If not, telling him could get you faster and more detailed feedback.

Sadly both papers don't sound like particularly good options. But, given how you describe the papers, I'd vote for paper 2. Paper 1 is short, draws on limited resources, and makes no interesting theoretical claims. Therefore, even though it's in the theoretical framework you want to work in, it doesn't do a good job showcasing your ability to do so. The goal of the writing sample is show you can do research - formulate a coherent research question, go out and find the relevant data, and use them to answer the question you posed. It should demonstrate your best writing and argumentation skills. It sounds like paper 2 does a better job of that. The pros for paper 2: a)it promises to be more in-depth, and very slightly longer, than paper 1, b)I have plenty of data, c)I have some lovely screencaps from Praat to use. It's not enough to just have a lot of data, though that's always nice *sigh*. You need to show you can use the data to develop and support an (original) argument. That's what the adcomm will look for. Cons: a)it's a historical linguistics paper, which is generally Not Done anymore, and which I don't want to study in grad school, b)I haven't finished it, and may not be able to finish it by my first deadline, c)my beautiful Praat screencaps are not actually very important to the topic. Re: a - don't worry about it too much. People are accepted from different fields and with papers in different topics than what they want to study in grad school. I'm sure you say in your SOP that you want to study phonology, not historical linguistics. Re c - again, it's nice that you know how to use praat but it's obviously not going to get you into a school. I don't think it's a pro or a con. Re b - um, that something to seriously worry about! Is the other paper ready to use for the earlier deadlines or would you have to seriously rework it?

I suspect that's hard to do well in the word limits the SOP imposes. The SOP is a statement of purpose, it should be future oriented, and spending 2-3 paragraphs giving your life history will tilt the balance of the SOP in the wrong direction. I imagine it's also possible that intertwining personal experience with research interests could make you seem less professional than talking about your interests from a safe analytical distance.

I'll only address 2, since you already know my opinion on 1 - I don't think it'll hurt your SOP if you don't have a hook. I am usually a proponent of the "get to the point" approach. Professors are busy people and most of the ones I know also subscribe to this approach. I think that starting with your interests right off the bat is really the best way to engage them and keep them interested. Personally I find the fluff at the beginning of SOPs distracting, and often skip opening paragraphs entirely when I read SOPs on LJ. That said, in cases where it's well written and motivated (e.g. when you need to explain how you got into the field if you have no prior background) - it could be fine to have a story-like hook.

OK, I resisted writing this yesterday two or three times, but I just can't any more. I have to admit I didn't read all of your last post. But: Content-wise, you come across as very naive. - Not everybody can make the best choices for themselves. There are scientists (in economics, psych, etc) who spend their entire careers studying rationale (or lack thereof) in decision making. - Not every professor is knowledgeable about the American grad school process. I know Americans forget that a world exists outside their continent, but it does. And one of my LOR writers, for example, had never before had a student apply to US schools. He was "ignorant about the process", as you so delicately put it. I still him to write me a letter. Surprising, I know. - You confuse "has a different opinion than me about what it means not to waive one's rights" with " ignorant about the process". But that's exactly the point of this thread. Dismissing the other opinion as crazy and therefore not worthy of considering is condescending and doesn't help us further the conversation at all. Style-wise, the reason I didn't read the whole post is that it came across to me as dismissive and quite aggressive. There's no need to use excess punctuation marks or whole UPPER CASE words. I can understand just fine when you just say what you think. You can disagree with my opinions, that's what drives this forum forward, but saying you don't care what others think? You really think that's respectful to the other participants in this debate? We're not just a wall for you to echo your ideas off of.

Samjones, I think we basically agree on the facts. In most every case, a professor is not going to waste her time writing someone a letter unless she believes that student is a strong applicant. The professor is going to know that her letter can't be read unless the student is accepted and enrolled, so she shouldn't have qualms about writing her true opinion of the student. And the adcomm is going to know that the professor knows this, so it shouldn't think anything of a student who didn't wave her rights. In a perfect world that will always be the case. I'm willing to believe that in our less-than-perfect world it's still going to be true most of the times. Call me paranoid, but all things being equal, I'd rather prepare for the worst case scenario. We've already agreed that it's not like I'd gain a whole lot from not waiving my rights -- after all I'll only ever get to read letters sent to the school I enrolled in, and since I was admitted there, how bad could the letters be? Given that, I choose to waive my right to see the letters and preempt the one crazy person on an adcomm that will be suspicious of my motives and disregard my letters. Why risk it?

What do you mean "the grad school suggests you apply in December"? Check the site more carefully. If there is no fixed deadline that would mean that the school has rolling admissions, in which case the sooner you get your application in, the better. If there's a deadline it shouldn't make a difference when you submit, as long as it's in time. In any case, December deadlines are not late.

Yes. But a strong candidate is still not a perfect candidate. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that a recommender will also want to talk about a student's weaknesses, despite the fact that she overall strongly endorses that student. Also, over the year I've been participating in this forum and a few other grad school related forums, I've had the chance to read about students who found out they got not-so-strong letters from professors they thought were supporters and who had agreed to write for them. You can fault the student for making a bad choice, the professor for being an ass, or both. But the fact remains that not all LORs are equally strong.

It's a conceptual question, though. It's not about what your recommenders actually think or do, it's how the adcomm perceives the situation. If it thinks the letters could be missing vital (negative) information about you that the writers were reluctant to mention because they were afraid you could see the letters, that makes them much less effective. I don't have evidence to say adcomms do or don't think this way, I'm just pointing out the logic.

More accurately, you can't view the letters before (unless) you are enrolled in the program. I think the common wisdom is that if your recommenders knew you will be able to see what they write later on, they might be reluctant to say bad things about you. If confidentiality is assured, then they can afford to be honest. I do think it's doubtful that professors will care too much if you read their letter several months after they had written it, given that you will only have the chance to do that if you were admitted (and then how bad could the letter be?); but on the other hand, if you view it this way, there doesn't seem to be a big advantage to not waiving your rights either.

Of course that's totally unethical and there will be serious consequences for being caught doing it.

Thanks for the advice, ruralworks4me! Winter clothes shopping has been on my to-do list for two months now. Can't postpone it much longer, though the weather has mostly been dry and nice. I'll be sure to check out the places you mention! Define "afford"

Just a general remark on this - some applications will actually cut you off after 1000 words (or however long their limit is) so that won't fly at all. In others, I've heard it said that going 5%-10% over the word limit still counts as OK. Personally I think these word limits are one of the more crucial rules to obey. As others have said, this is something you'll be expected to do throughout your career in academia.

That logic doesn't work, though. This act only gives enrolled students the right to view the contents of their files. If you are not admitted to a given institution, you have no legal right to see the recommendations anyway, unless you are a currently or previously-enrolled student at that university.

Most schools allow (and prefer) online LOR submission. Those that don't - some will want the writer to send the letter themselves; whenever that's not the case, it's better to pick up the letter and send it yourself along with the rest of your app - that way you know when it left and can track it, and the chances of it being lost are smaller. If you're applying to research-based programs then you should have at least two recommendations from professors who can tell the adcomms about your ability to do research. If your programs are practical/industry oriented, then two letters from former employers could be ok.

I had two phone interviews and one school invited me to an open house/interview weekend*. None had mentioned anything about this on their website, they just contacted me via email some time in January. I ended up declining all three of these offers,which were all from weaker schools. The stronger schools just accepted me without ever talking to me, but did invite me to visit after I had been accepted and before it was time to choose schools - two had open house days, three just let me come whenever. No one mentioned funding for a visit from overseas beforehand. All in all the information about the process after submitting the apps was not particularly clear on any of the schools' sites that I applied to. *That has to be the scariest. Think about being rejected after an interview weekend - "we thought you were interesting, enough so that we flew you over from across the Atlantic, but now that we've had a chance to see you and talk to you - uh, no. Thanks."

I'd be glad to help some more if you want to PM me your opening paragraph; from what you write it's hard to know. It sounds right on the border between acceptable and anecdotal. Again, if you can have a LOR writer address whatever difficulty you encountered, that might be the best course of action. I, too, at one point thought that an anecdotal opening would be strongest, but in hindsight I'm very happy I was talked out of it. I ended up opening with a few very focused questions I wanted to research, and I think it worked out for the best.

I would guess the NO ANECDOTES instruction is there to keep the adcomms from having to read 500 SOPs that begin "Ever since my childhood....". No one cares that you've wanted to be a firefighter/astronaut/doctor/lawyer since you were 5--the question it what makes you qualified now. The kind of anecdote you're thinking about seems different, and I think it could actually be a very good way of addressing delicate issues in your past without going into cumbersome unneeded details. (Having a LOR writer do it for you could also be a pretty good tactic.)

CHOCTICK, I am sure you will be here shortly to tell us to take it easy and that you were only joking. Maybe this is a good time to point out again that NOT EVERYBODY LAUGHS AT THE SAME THINGS. So, as we have been saying time and time again, it might be better if you kept the humor out of your SOP. At the same time, it would also be nice if you at least pretended to appreciate our efforts to help you. We don't work for you and don't get paid (if we are, I'll have you know that my check is also late!), but we're willing to invest the time to try and help if we think we're doing some good. But for you advice just seems to go in one ear and out the other. That's why we think you might be a troll--I'm still not convinced you're not.