fuzzylogician

I would take this POI seriously and see if you can find anyone who'd be willing to write some note saying that you have "passive reading and hearing ability of French". It doesn't matter what it means, as long as someone is willing to sign that note for you. It's all just bureaucracy anyway, and that's what they are trying to tell you. If you took French courses at your current school, hopefully your teacher will agree to help you, or maybe your former (high school?) teacher remembers you... Otherwise, you might have a bit more explaining to do but maybe there is someone around who could help. All they need is something official-looking enough.

- If you only have one publication, the combined "presentations and publications" section is a good solution. - Specifically, though: list paper/poster/talk titles, as well as co-authors. Listing co-authors in order will take away the need to explicitly say "first-authored abstract". Use whatever citation style is common in your field (check some of the leading journals if you're not sure, or browse your professors' CVs to see how they do it). Also, instead of "planned", it might be better to say "accepted" (assuming that's true! otherwise, this shouldn't be on your CV at all). It's customary to add dates (month, year) and location for conferences. - For graduation, you could simply leave it as "May 2017". If you want to have a season, that would be Spring 2017 at most schools. - For the position that is ongoing, you might do something like Summer 2015 - (Spring 2017); I usually just use the notation "Summer 2016 –" to indicate that the entry is current. Presumably you'll talk about this position in your SOP. It matters less precisely how long it'll last in the future and more what you've done so far and what you've learned. Concentrate on that. These other details aren't going to make or break your application and it's no use stressing over them. Any reasonably decision would be fine, just make it consistent.

- Adhere to the 5000 word limit. This school sounds like it is not interested in reading too much from each applicant. Longer papers than allowed will be noticeable and not appreciated. - The 500 word limit is not as rare as you might think. Think of it as an exercise in distilling your ideas to their very essence. Personally, once I did that with my own ~850-word statement, I was actually very happy with the result (though the process itself was excruciating). Once I had the 500-word version, I ended up building on it and adding back just a bit more, for a roughly 650-word statement if there were no other constraints. In any event, follow the rules, even if it's hard. - Again, given that this school seems to have minimalistic requirements, I would bet that they mean 20 pages all included. More generally, unless you are explicitly told otherwise, you should always assume that 20 means 20, not 20+whatever. If you are unsure, email to ask. If you don't get a reply, assume the stricter limit. It's better than breaking the rules because you made false assumptions.

This thread is a year old so one would hope that the OP has solved her problem. As for page limits, include everything unless you are told otherwise. Ask the schools if you are uncertain. There is not going to be one correct answer that fits all, and you don't want to break the rules just because someone on the internet said it was ok.

I suggest you browse the interviews subforum. There have been multiple discussions there about how to prepare for interviews and what questions you might expect. The things you are contemplating sound reasonable. The first bullet point may never come up as is, but something like the second likely will, in the form of "tell me about yourself" or "so why do you want to work with me/in my lab." Also be prepared to talk about any prior research experience you've had, how your interests have developed or what inspired them, and overall fit with the lab/PI. It's also good to have a couple of questions prepared, but not too many, and not things that are obviously available online. If this is pre-admissions, you could end by asking about a timeline for decisions by this lab/department, among other things. Also, you might ask about funding, how many students they expect to accept, if there are new projects in the pipeline (applications submitted to [funding agency] or recently funded), what alumni tend to do, what type of students do best in [lab/department]. Finally, remember to relax and breath. This is as much for you to gauge interest in the PI as for them to gauge interest in you. It's fine to ask someone to repeat a question if you didn't understand it, and to say that you don't know the answer to something if you don't (that's better than making something up or rambling). It's also fine to say you're nervous, and even to say "let me start over" and basically redo an answer, if you get flustered. Good luck!

Please talk to the ombudsperson before you do anything else. What you should really be concerned about is not so much this one grade and more so your reputation within your program and your relationships with your professors. It's very easy to say or do the wrong thing, and you are obviously upset and worrying a lot, so don't do something now that you will regret later. Even though you were exonerated, the professor who made the allegation may still believe it has merit and may still be upset. You want to get to the point where you agree to have a truce, even if you never speak to each other again, because you stand to lose a whole lot more than s/he does. Be slow and smart about how you go about getting the grade you deserve without creating more tension than necessary. You may be entirely in the right and the professor entirely in the wrong, but s/he still has the power to hurt you by talking about this to other professors in a way that's not how you would like. (Note again: I am not talking at all about blame and who is right, just about what is smart to do.) So, get an outside opinion about the best next moves from someone who actually knows the school and the procedures. If the paper was ruled to be original work and the allegation was that it was too good to be yours, it doesn't make sense that it got an F. You want to bring that up with the ombudsperson, and at the same time talk about how best to mend the relationship with the professor, or at least part on decent terms. Please take care of both; I understand that you worry more about the grade, but in the bigger picture it's the relationship that matters more.

Please seek more help. Find the law clinic or schedule a meeting with the ombudsperson. I thought from previous posts that you'd already gone in front of a committee and it's too bad no one made sure that you had someone to protect your rights during that process. But since is not over yet, it's not too late to get help. These research ethics processes can vary by school and they usually have very strict rules, so we can't answer these questions for you. You should have been provided with the guidelines when the plagiarism allegation was made and before you defended yourself to the committee, and those should be very clear about the process. If I had to guess, I would guess that you should have access to a graded version of the work but that they will insist on also keeping a copy for their records. I'm not sure what you mean by them asking uncomfortable questions (I thought you'd already gone in front of the committee), but this is why I say you should not do any of this alone, you should have someone calmer and more experienced with you who has your interests in heart making sure that everything is done right. If there is an official hearing you may refuse to answer a question but there will be inferences that the committee will draw from that. And yes, it would be rude to just leave the room, and again, this is what you have an advocate for, to protect your rights, counsel you, and even ask for a break if you need one. As for who to ask for feedback, that's really hard to say. This is too specific to be able to answer without knowing who's involved. I doubt anyone from your school will want to provide a second opinion if they aren't required to, it's a messy situation and no one will want to be a part of it if they don't have to be.

Ah, the plot thickens... Given this new detail, I'd say email tomorrow if you have anything to say that is relevant pre-submission; otherwise, the post-submission plan also makes sense. I am from a field where these emails aren't the norm and I didn't send any myself, so you may want to also consult with someone with more specific knowledge of your field.

This sounds like a comment field that is designed to allow anyone with lower scores to explain why they aren't a true reflection of their abilities. If you have good grades, there is nothing to explain. It's okay to either leave it blank or give a short reply like TakeruK suggests. Don't overthink it.

It's not good news mostly because this makes your email seem like one of those obvious mass-emails that students sometimes send to professors where it's clear that they didn't do any research and don't know anything about the lab or potential fit. Most PIs won't respond to such emails because the student didn't put any thought into them. If you had discovered the mistake right after sending the email, I would recommend immediately following up, fixing the mistake, and apologizing. In this case, you might wait another week or so to put some distance between this last email and a new one, then email again (not forwarding the old email!). If you choose to do this, you might want to make sure that the email is personalized and that there are no similar mistakes. You may or may not get a reply, but you have nothing to lose by trying. No one can tell you if this will affect your chances of admission; of course this kind of thing doesn't help, but it's hard to tell if it can hurt or how much. Send the second email, and then apply and don't worry about it any further. You can't do much to change the mistake, but that's all it is, and usually it's not any one single thing that affects the outcome. Grad school admissions are a holistic process, so you just need to try your best and hope it works out. There are so many considerations that do into these decisions beyond if someone wrote the wrong lab name in an email.

Good luck.

The secretary isn't the right person to talk to about this; she can't make any decisions about grades. She might know who the right person to talk to would be, or what are the best next moves, but she won't actually be the person you should talk to. The specific grounds for an appeal sound school-specific so you need to figure out when they are appropriate and whether your case fits. My guess at this point is that you should do one of two things, maybe both. First, if you didn't have any representation during the panel process, this would be a good time to find out if you could get representation. Schools will often have a law clinic with law students who volunteer to help students precisely in these kinds of situations. They will have experience in how to handle the case and who to talk to. If you did have representation, go talk to them about the next steps. Second, you might reach out to the ombudsperson at your school. S/he would again have ways of figuring out how to approach the problem and who to talk to, and they might be a good person to help you mend the relationship with the professor, too.

Well that certainly changes things. It's also still a bit mysterious to me how this all happened. If they suspected that you are a B- student and therefore did not write the paper in question, it would presumably have to be an A paper, not a failing paper. So I don't understand how it's possible that the problem is with the grading. I would expect that this is a punishment for suspected plagiarism, so asking for a regrade would not do you any good. It seems to me that the bigger problem is possible broken relationships with your professor and any other faculty members who are aware of what happened, and that if you want to fix it, you need to have a meeting with the professor and demonstrate real knowledge of the material and a desire to mend the relationship. It goes beyond this one grade. But in any event I am not sure I can give you good advice here, because I have the feeling that I still don't have (or understand) all the facts.

It's impossible for us to answer this question. You need to get the assignment back, look at the feedback and where you lost points, and then probably schedule a meeting with your professor to go over anything that wasn't clear. We can't tell you what went wrong when we don't have access to your assignment or the comments you got. But yes, I can see how a student could get a low grade on such an assignment in general, e.g. if they missed foundational work in the area they are writing about, misunderstood arguments made in said paper, failed to do any synthesis of ideas and simply listed what others have said without showing that they've actually digested any of it, failed to use appropriate citation etiquette, to name just some things that might go wrong (which may or may not be relevant for you!). Again, you need to see the actual paper and actual comments and then talk to your professor about the assignment and if there is any way to fix it. If this paper is going to be the basis of future work, you want to bring it to a more acceptable level anyway, and you could ask your professor to help with that.

Sounds like you should indeed leave your program. My advice would be to have a meeting with your advisor and/or DGS/chair and say a version of what you said here, concentrating on the personal aspects of "I have come to realize I want to work with people, not conduct research, and therefore I've concluded that the PhD is not the right choice for me anymore." You might mention that you've decided that a MSW is a better fit for you, and you might also describe your future career goals and how this new path would be better suited to help you get there than the PhD. I'd see how the conversation goes and choose how many details to give based on that. Your advisor and other professors might be surprised or sorry to see you leave, but hopefully they should understand. Keep in mind that while this has been on your mind for a while, it may come as a shock to them. So give them time and understand if they don't react as well as you'd like initially; but I don't think there is anything you can do other than tell your truth. Remember to thank them for everything they've done for you, their support and the time they've invested in your education so far. It'd be good if you could leave on good terms, with everyone rooting for you to be successful in your new chosen path.

I would just say "research assistant, lab X, 201X-2016" and not worry about it. A three month gap in employment is not something anyone would think about twice.

For unfunded programs, my guess is that you have to deal with each offer as it comes. You submit for each deadline, and if you get an offer you ask when you need to decide by. If it's before the other programs have made a decision (but after the submission deadline), you could contact them to ask when you can expect a decision, and you can also mention that you have another offer and need to decide by date X. If you don't hear back in time or it's before the submission deadline, I don't think you have any other choice but to accept the offer you have in hand; you can't just hope things will work out if you decline. However, in the case of unfunded programs, I have no qualms saying that if you receive a better offer, I think it's totally fair to rescind from the other school (hopefully this doesn't involve any lost fees), and taking the better one. This is not advised in the case of funded offers, and that's partly why the April 15 resolution is there, but that doesn't apply to unfunded Masters programs, so the rules of the game are just different. You need to do what's best for you.

I don't think anyone can answer these questions. There may be effects on public education funding that would affect how many students can be admitted to PhD programs. There may be changes to how student visas are issued. There may be more constraints on work visas. Everything is on the table right now, and no one knows. This obviously doesn't make anyone feel any better about the situation, but that's where it stands right now. I don't think anyone here can make you any promises about whether you'll be able to get a work visa after you graduate, just like no one can guarantee you what the job market will look like more generally. It's unfortunate, but that's the reality we are living in right now.

Is there some trusted advisor who you could talk to about this? To successfully do this, you'll need your current professors' support (as in, positive LORs and maybe some help pulling strings to get your into another program). So it would be unavoidable to bring this up with at least one person. I think there is a wave of pessimism right now that I truly hope will go away with time; so in part it's a wait and see situation. If you're serious, though, application deadlines in are in a month or two, which is why I am also suggesting that you talk to someone close, so you don't get stuck later. If you only make the decision in January or March or later, you may have to wait another year before you can find yourself funding in another program and be able to move.

If you are sure that your information is correct, you might write about those properties the school has as something you look for in a program that would best fit your interests and personality just as things you want, and let them say "oh, that's exactly what we are about, that's a good fit!", but it may also backfire if they don't see themselves that way (even if the student you talk to does). I don't think saying something like "I heard from alums that your program is awesome" is too useful; but you could say something like "something I look for in a program is [blah], and from talking to current students/alums [in X context], I understand that this is something that Program emphasizes. This is another reason why I think it would be a good fit for my goals". Either way, I don't think having or not having this one sentence will make a huge difference.

In general, the AWA score is considered the least important of the GRE sections. Not that it guarantees anything, but it's useful to know. Also relevant: what is your TOEFL score and what do your essays look like? If you have a high writing score in the TOEFL and you have polished essays (SOP, writing sample), plus maybe you can get a LOR writer to talk about your English skills, then that would be massive evidence against this lower AWA score.

It's common for linguistics departments to do post-acceptance Open House events to try and recruit students. Some programs do interviews, or they might want to talk to some students if they aren't sure about something to do with their application even if they don't have official interviews. Most of those will be Skype/phone interviews, just because of the funding and logistics involved. I think I had two phone interviews and I had an invitation to an on-campus (pre-acceptance) interview that I declined. I'm not sure if those schools still do things in the same way, which is why I'm not posting names. But yes, it happens sometimes, though often enough you'll submit your application and then just hear back a yes or no without any communication inbetween.

I don't think that is generally the case. The J1 visa documents need to be issued by your American university and the actual visa will be issued by your local US embassy or consulate. I have never heard of the US actually depending on the sponsorship of another government, but maybe I'm just not understanding what you mean by that. There are rules about where the funding needs to come from in order to make you eligible for the J1 visa, and one way to acquire it is to come with an external scholarship (funded by your home government, Fulbright, or another external source, just not your own savings), in which case often you will be subject to the 2-year home requirement. Some schools will also agree to use department/university-internal funding sources as good enough for J1 purposes, but that varies and is up to the school. In that case, I think that you aren't going to have a two-year home requirement. In any case, if you are already subject to this requirement because of your current visa, this detail doesn't matter. All it means is that you won't be able to get a dual-purpose or immigration visa after you are done studying, but you should still be able to get another non-immigration visa like another J1 or F1. If you ever want to have a more permanent position in the US (as a professor or in industry), at that point you'll need to either get an exemption (rare) or go back home and wait the two years out (and it's just two years, it won't become four if you get another J1 visa). In any of these cases, I don't believe that your immigration status in the US is something that your home country needs to officially sponsor. It's just not something that the US would want to do, they would want to decide based on their own criteria, not be dictated to.

You could ask but I doubt you'd get a satisfying answer. This seems like a totally generic reply so you might just respond with a 'thank you'. You don't need to feel obligated to continue the conversation, this reply doesn't really suggest that he is interested in that. (But of course if you actually have questions about the program, he has indicated that he is willing to answer them. Just make sure they're not clearly answered already on the department website.) Otherwise, I'd leave this alone and would at most follow up after submitting the application to let him know that you did.

I cold-emailed some people when I was about to graduate to ask about postdoc positions, but they were all people who I knew to some extent (as in, I met them at conferences at least once and I knew that they would know who I am). When I did this, I didn't send any materials along, I just basically said something like "as you may know, I am graduating from [School] this summer and am starting to plan for [Next year]. While I am still waiting to hear back from applications to TT positions, I have also started considering postdoc applications.* I think that your research would be a great match with mine and [I am eager to learn the methods you use, work on the language you work on, whatevs]. Therefore, I am writing to ask if you are going to have any funding to hire a new postdoc next year. If so I would appreciate being considered for the position and would be very happy to talk further or provide any necessary documents. If you don't have any funding but know of someone else who might, I'd appreciate knowing that, too." (This was composed on the fly now, it's not actual text I used, but it's a good reflection of the content.) These either led to "let's chat on Skype" or to "sorry I don't have funding (but try X, who might)". Some people I know had their advisors make the initial introductions, if it was a person the student had never met but the advisor knew. I gather that your situation is different in that you're emailing people who you may not know. I think that it would be important to keep the email short and to make it clear why you are writing the person. That is, say what you do in a sentence or two, and explain very briefly why this person is a good fit for you. These professors get lots of emails that are clearly mass-emails that aren't customized and often obviously aren't a good fit, and you want to make sure you're not perceived as one of those. The main difference from an advertised position probably isn't in demonstrating that you're a good fit for the lab or the content of the text, but in getting the person to consider you in the first place. To that end, short and sweet is key. Otherwise, I'd imagine it's mostly the same. I'd add a link to your academic website, and I am not sure about sending attachments to unsolicited emails, but I suppose this is too field-specific for me to have an opinion on. As for in-person inquiries, could you email the person ahead of time and ask for a short chat over some coffee break? This is definitely not something to do before a person gives their talk (they are otherwise preoccupied), and after the talk there will likely be several people who want to talk to them, so it'd be awkward to have the conversations with other random people standing around. Most people should be able to find time for a 5-10 minute chat at some point over a multi-day conference, though, and I'd just email to ask for this ahead of time to make sure you're not forgotten. If that's not possible, see if you can ask them when they might have time for a short chat after their talk, and send a follow-up email with a proposed time immediately after (or confirming what you agreed to). You can always just ask a random question and then email later, building on the fact that the person will hopefully remember you from your conversation at the conference. * The cycle for us is always TT positions first, postdocs (other than competitive ones) later. I don't know if this holds for you.