fuzzylogician

Ignoring the sidetracking comments, @orange turtle, you are completely justified in your feelings, and I am sorry that happened to you; your advisor's reaction is demoralizing and a real shame, in part because of what it probably means about her experiences of being a woman in your field and more importantly for how it's impacted you. Since we're talking about Canada and not the US, you can talk to someone in a position of authority without them being required to report it (as I understand it). It's up to you if you choose to do so and what other steps you choose to take. I can see several decisions that might make sense, given other circumstances. One thing to definitely do from now on is to document every interaction with CreepProf, so you have contemporaneous notes of everything that happens. From there, it's really a question for you and unfortunately a question of politics as to what makes sense next. It seems pretty clear that your advisor isn't going to be a supporter on this front, but an important question is whether she will object, or if this could affect your letters from her. (I'm assuming that you're definitely not getting a letter from CreepProf, so you're already limiting your options given that this is someone you've worked with who otherwise would write you a letter.) I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that an older married dude who's been around for a while has done this before. You can't possibly be the first one. Now, it's a whole other matter whether the department is aware and what it would be willing to do about it. It could be that each person thinks she's the only one, worries for her career, and doesn't report. It's also unfortunately entirely possible that people have reported in the past and didn't get the necessary support, and were pushed out one way or another. There has to be some rumor mill surrounding this that maybe has some info. This is crucial -- doing this alone is possible but very difficult. It's much easier if there is someone who can be on your side. And even so, unfortunately, the victim bears the burden of proof and you have to continue wallowing in it for a long time, since these procedures can take months and months. I am not trying to tell you what to do at all -- but it's important to be aware of the potential consequences and to do it the right way. Either way, your concern should be for your own well being and your career, definitely *not* for him and how he might be impacted!

There's the GRE subforum where some members post essays and occasionally get help. Frankly, though, I'm surprised that Magoosh is sending people here for essay critiques since this is not the purpose of this board. I think regular posters are on the whole much more inclined to help other regular posters who might occasionally post an essay but are otherwise contributing board-members than random newcomers who are only here to get help with a GRE essay but aren't going to pay it forward in any way. That said, you can try and post your essay and see if anyone replies.

I keep digital copies of everything, including EVERYTHING. I scan and purge hard copies of papers, handouts, and other notes, about once a semester.

I was in a somewhat similar situation before starting my PhD; I chose to leave for the degree, and I don't regret it. As others have mentioned, if your SO can't be supportive of your career even for short periods and that's really a passion for you, it'll put a strain on the relationship in the long term. For me, it was clear that giving up my passion for the relationship would lead to what-ifs and resentment. The academic life requires some flexibility in terms of living arrangements, and if they can't accept that, you either need to be okay (but really okay!) with giving it up, or maybe the relationship isn't strong enough and will end up badly anyway. Either choice is fair and is a personal decision, but you need to really think about what will make you happy in the long term and what you're willing to give up.

If he has been a good and supportive advisor, I think you may benefit from seeing this statement in a completely different way: "I enjoy having you as a student and worry about not having you around after this semester". If it were me in this situation, that is what I would mean by such a statement, with every intention of wanting you to stay, if that's what you want. I understand that it's an unpleasant thing to hear, and I'm sure it's a difficult thing to say. I hope that you've been able to ask why and to ask for help in passing, since I'm sure that's your ultimate goal and that's something your advisor wants for you. He may be seeing systemic issues with how you approach problems or with your work style that he may think are incompatible with the life of an academic, and those are hard to fix (and just to be very very clear, that doesn't diminish you and your work in any way, it's simply that it takes a specific kind of person to really succeed *and be happy* in academia). But he may still have thoughts, and there may be some habits you can change, or skills you can learn. So, while this is a difficult conversation, since he's initiating it, it's important to follow through and really have it.

It's a bit hard to plan, but you can try and practice some replies to statements or questions you might get at that meeting. "Let me think about it and get back to you" is a very good one, as is "oh, that's an interesting idea; I think I'd like to discuss it with [other supervisor] so we can think more about how it fits into this project". But aside from those hedges, at this point in your writing process I think it should also be perfectly acceptable to simply say "I think at this point I should just be writing, and not adding new components to the dissertation" and even muse about a deadline for finishing writing. You can say that other additions could be great for a paper, but maybe the dissertation can do without them. This is partly a style issue, but some people have a hard time deciding when a project is done and ready to be written up. It's hardly ever when there is nothing else one could do or think about, but it's when you think you have a strong enough standalone piece that makes an interesting and important contribution. If you're working with one of those "but what about X, and what happens if we do Y" people, you need to gently but firmly push back and tell them those are excellent questions for the next part of the project, but now we're in the writing stages of this one and we shouldn't get distracted. Of course that's not easy when there's a power differential, which is why it would help if your other supervisor could be brought in on your side in these discussions. (Also, important lesson for future collaborations: this is something that is good to know about potential collaborators before you get too deep into a project. These incompatibilities can cause a lot of trouble if you don't know how to manage them.) Therefore, it's important not to just say "yes" to things, but say you need to think them over and discuss them with your other supervisor. Hopefully you can then resolve things in an email or in person, but with their support in saying "later" or "no". As for the email question, I think the thing to say is a version of that you're surprised it was forwarded because you thought it was private and you were just venting, and pivot back to the important points: you are getting worn down by the process, you would really like to finish by [date], and you think at this point it's best to write up what you have for the dissertation and not add new things, and later you can all discuss adding something to a paper if needed. But frankly occasionally it's better to submit a first draft and just see what reviewers ask for, and go from there. They may not even think any new experiments are needed, or they may want other ones than what your supervisor proposes.

Linguistics is a field that routinely accepts PhD applicants who don't have an MA in the field, and even applicants who don't have a BA in the field, since there are still quite a few schools that don't have a linguistics program that's independent of English/languages/cogsci/etc. That by itself shouldn't be a hinderance to being accepted to a PhD program. I'm not sure what you mean by lacking "other normal qualifications". It sounds like you can show continued interest in the field both through academic venues (grad courses) and otherwise (teaching English abroad, though you'd have to tie it directly to linguistic theory/practice for it to be really relevant). The main thing you might be missing is a strong writing sample and/or recommendations from people in the field, the former is more easily tended to than the latter at this point in the year. I'll refrain from offering more thoughts until I know they're relevant. Generally, as always, you want to have a strong and focused SOP and you want to choose schools that can support your research interests. You'll probably also need to discuss your less than direct path to the PhD (which shouldn't be a problem to explain, but I'd do it because otherwise people might be curious and/or suspicious). Any other, more specific, questions?

Good luck!

Try using a different browser or computer. Or you might have to wait until Monday (or later) for things to update in some computer system. If nothing works, you may have to contact the ministère for help (though I don't know how helpful they can/will be), or maybe this is something the international students office at your school can have access to. It may just take a few days for this to work itself out.

Even if someone could tell you that at their school X or Y is the case, you don't want to take that as necessarily correct for your school as well. It'll eventually probably come down to who pays your salary, but I don't think we know it's the same across the board, and anyway you wouldn't want to count on my (or anyone's) guess. Seriously, this is not something to mess with.

You should absolutely NOT just ask strangers on the internet and take our word for it. Ask the International Students Office at your school to get a qualified answer you can trust.

I would vote for some version of option 2. Best if there is a trusted advisor/professor/DGS who you can turn to to help you navigate the situation. They must remember the past history between you two; I'm not sure why they would have assigned you to this professor, but it would be in everyone's best interest to avoid a repeat of any allegations and drama. You don't even need to come out and explicitly say it, the problem should be clear.

What happened after the students went to the head of the department? Is there a chance you can refer all complaints to the professor and let them deal with it? It's not worth getting into fights in this situation, as the person with the least amount of power in the situation. Even if you think someone is getting a grade they don't deserve, it's not your problem if someone else decided to give it to them. I'd find a way to farm off problem students to be someone else's responsibility, if possible. If not, this might be a good time to start documenting everything and running everything past your professor (do they give you a rubric or do you make one -- either way, maybe you want to run what you do by them to get their approval, that way you can't be blamed for anything). However, before taking more drastic measures, it'll help to know if they had your back given these students complaints -- they might have, but just didn't do a good job communicating it.

People go through graduate programs at the same time as working, raising a family, taking care of elderly parents, commuting long-distance, etc. You choose how much time to invest in your education and how much time to spend on other things. There may be busier times and not as busy times during your program, but like anything else, it's all about prioritizing. If pursuing a hobby is important to you, you should be able to make time for it.

I'm confused about your situation. You've gone through a 5-year PhD program, can't finish, and you want to start a new program? That might be hard without getting letters of recommendation from your current professors or having much to show (research-wise) from your current program. It's also unclear how that could take less time than working to get your paper published, since you say that work has been done and the paper already exists. Maybe this is the time to look for school-internal remedies for how to deal with an advisor who won't let you graduate but also isn't taking the steps to get your work up to par to where it could be defendable (the ombudsperson comes to mind). Overall, though, having a PhD based on just one paper that you can't get published doesn't sound like necessarily the best position to start a career from. Maybe it's worth improving the work, like it sounds that your advisors want.

As always in an interview situation, don't volunteer information no one asked about. If they ask about a potential start date, at this point you probably want to repeat a version of what you put in your application, assuming it's actually doable. (It might not come up until later, if and when they want to make you an offer; salary might also only come up later, but you should have some thoughts about a range now.) You can also definitely say that you are flexible, and play that up as an advantage. Be aware that committing to a start date before you can finish your dissertation could cause delays in getting it done; I personally would prefer to finish the degree first, but I also know people who took a job early because one came along, and finished the dissertation later in their spare time. It almost always took longer than otherwise, but it's still doable. If you can suss out when would be a good start date for them, you can play up your flexibility to suit their needs. A job that's a great fit doesn't come along every day. This also probably goes without saying, but you should have ways of talking about your dissertation that aren't too technical for your interviewers. If they ask about your progress, you can feel free to tell them how many chapters you've written/plan to write, and offer to give more details of the content of each and an overview. I generally always prefer to give the bigger picture and invite them to ask more questions. Depending on the job, they may or may not have any idea what's involved in getting a PhD, and you don't need to educate them beyond some generalities to give them an idea of what you do and how long it should take you, unless they want to hear more.

I strongly advise you to talk to the International Students Office at your school about these questions. This is too specific for us to give general advice, and we are not immigration lawyers or specialists. I think you have to enter the US within a certain date after whatever is stated on your I-20 (30 days, I think? but in the Trump era, who knows anymore), so if you defer by a semester you may have to redo the entire process, including SEVIS and visa (but again, you need to check this with a professional). I'm pretty sure you can't just get a visa and then not attend starting whenever the I-20 says you should, and be able to use the same paperwork for what would then be a different course of study as far as immigration is concerned. I would suggest not telling this story to anyone when you have your interview, simply because it's not relevant. Unless you've decided to defer, in which case going for the interview is a waste of time and money, you go because your current plan as of the time of the interview is to start school in the fall. The complications with housing and your job aren't relevant to the interview. That's for you to figure out. Most international students can figure out housing from afar, and hopefully you can do the same, even if it's not ideal for the first year. There's subletting, university housing, paying a realtor to help, using local connections through your future department/university. I'm not saying it's easy (been there, done that, I remember the stress it came with), but it's doable. You just need to make a decision and start making a plan.

Not to repeat the advice you received above, which I agree with -- I just want to add that changing your interests will not look bad at all. In fact, it's entirely common, even expected, that students (any academic, really), will evolve and change their research interests with time. To the extent that anyone will actually see your first-year bio and remember it, no one looking at it again in your 3rd year would be surprised to learn that you might have grown and redirected your interests elsewhere.

Ah, in that case I suggest that you take a step back and simply take more classes and get involved in research. Find out what you like more specifically, because your list is very broad and very vague. A PhD is about depth, not breadth. You do take courses for two years and there is place to learn and grow (in fact, it's necessary!), but you need to have a much better idea of what you want so you can apply to the right schools and get the kind of education you need to pursue your research interests. Yeah, did I mention you're vague? That's pretty much everything in experimental linguistics. But my point above is this: you use these tools to study a research question. What is the question (or set of questions) you are interested in? My perspective is that you pick the right tools to get at informed answers to research questions; you don't simply pick up tools and throw them against the wall and see what sticks without a purpose. Brain imaging, in particular, is very expensive. If you don't have a goal in mind for putting a bunch of people in the scanner, you'll be wasting a lot of time and money. So again, you start from the research interests, then you develop the tools to study them (both experimental and theoretical, by the way). You need to figure this part out before we can tell you what schools are right for you.

More info is needed. If you're looking to study psycholing at a top theory school, you'll want to study some problem from an experimental perspective, but you didn't tell us what subfieds/questions interest you. If you are on the applied side, you need to tell us that too. While we're at it: is there a particular methodology that appeals to you?

If you can condense your 50-page paper into a 35-page paper without significant loss of content, you should absolutely do that. Never make your readers work harder than they have to. If that's not possible, I would personally opt for the whole thing + designated pages. My take on submitting the whole thing with instructions to read Part X is that it's worth taking the extra time to create a kind of (short!) summary or abstract of the rest of the work, to situate the excerpt in context. I assume that at least some readers will only read the designated part; some readers may read more, if interested, but most probably won't read the whole thing. So to avoid the cons of Option 1 and maximize the potential pros of Option 2, providing a short summary can help provide the broader frame and direct readers to where they can read more if they're particularly interested in X or Y, so it's not too choppy when they go to the excerpt. That said, a 35-page excerpt out of a 50 page paper could be kind of awkward, if those are the parameters. If you can find a way to make it a standalone piece, that would be best.

I went to a different school but one that also required its own exam of all international students regardless of any other credentials. Talk to the professor about holding the position for you since there is no way for you to do anything else about it.

^This. Most often this is just straightforward bureaucracy and means nothing about the status of your application one way or the other. HR is trying to collect stats on who is applying for positions, and this most likely won't factor into the search committee's decision.

If students are too young for you, you might try to find events that target postdocs and junior faculty, who are more likely to be in the right age-range for you. Not all events will be open to grad students, but some social events might be.

1. Writing the school's address seems reasonable to me, if you don't have something more permanent yet. 2-3. To my knowledge, there is no way to update the DS-160 once you submit it, so you'll just explain that your address has changed in the interview, if asked (I doubt it'll come up, though). You won't the first or last person not to have accommodations pre-arranged, so don't worry about this too much. 4. After the interview the DS-160 doesn't matter anymore and you don't need to update it. 5. If anyone asks when you cross the border, you simply explain that you didn't have permanent accommodations so you gave your school's address because that's where you could be reached. Simple as that. Again, I doubt anyone is going to ask. Disclaimer: I am not an immigration lawyer. Ask your school's ISO if in doubt.