fuzzylogician

My main advice would be to get in touch with an immigration lawyer who specializes in F-1 visas. I don't think that getting denied a visa is a frequent occasion, and I don't think that relying on the anecdotal experiences of others online would help. You need to understand *why* you were denied the visa the first time, and the second time, and what, if anything, you can do to obtain a different result if you try a third. You say you suspect bias, but I don't know what that means or whether you can document that and do anything about it. The only cases I know of where this happened was with schools that are known as "visa mills" but aren't serious institutions of higher learning. If that is not the case, and you don't have a history of immigration violations (overstaying on a (tourist) visa, working without permission, etc), then this is unusual, and you need professional help. Maybe something you said in the interview raised a red flag (e.g. you didn't show ties to your home country, or you specifically discussed an intention to stay in the US after your studies); if nothing changed in the second interview, that might explain the second rejection (was anything different the second time around? were you given an explanation for the rejections?). But, these are nothing more than guesses.

Yes, definitely state explicitly when something is wrong, this is not something that anyone can just guess, even if you think it's obvious (and even if it is, some people just aren't good at interpreting social cues). As I said above, it's good to just have the conversation, and better to do it early, before you get very frustrated and it becomes a bigger deal than it needs to be. If your advisor doesn't even realize that there is a problem, of course it's not going to get fixed. I'd advise you to also think about what kind of feedback you want and at what frequency, because that might come up (and if not, you might want to bring it up). Think of things that your advisor can do that are within what he is actually likely to be able to commit to, so that both of you can be comfortable with the new arrangement.

It's of course better if it can help with your own studies, but the point is to work to satisfy your contract so that you can earn a salary/have insurance/get an education. Not unlike your situation, when people get assigned TAships, some of them will get to teach classes that are related to their area of study, but inevitably someone will teach something outside of their immediate interests, and someone will get stuck with something that's not even remotely close to what they do. Such is life. You can ask to switch with someone else and you can state your preference to have something that more closely matches your interests, but you have to understand that it may not work out. There are a certain number of positions and a certain number of people and the match isn't always going to be perfect. It will probably help the most if you could actually suggest an alternative solution: identify someone who you could switch with (who would also be happy to switch with you). Complaining without pointing out a solution is less likely to work.

With the caveat about field-specific differences, I think it's fine to use bullet points. The goal is to put just as much information as necessary for your readers to understand what you were doing, no need for complete sentences. Bullet points are a good way to convey that. A useful structure for your poster depends on what you are trying to convey with it, but there is no one correct way of doing things, as long as you get your point across. There are general advice posts you can find by doing a quick search, to give you some idea of how to go about choosing colors, font sizes, etc. Is there any chance you can find some sample posters from your field? For example, a google image search for "poster psychology" yields several results that look like they could be helpful. Edit: and here are guidelines for my field, in case they help: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/lsa-poster-guidelines

To my knowledge the AW score is the least important of the GRE scores, especially if you are also submitting a writing sample (and a TOEFL score, if you are international). I would not pay for a re-score because I can't imagine a 2.5 going up much beyond a 3, if at all, and both scores are pretty bad. So either you retake the exam, or you live with the score. The one thing you might want to find out is whether any school you are applying to has (unofficial) cutoffs that this score could cause a problem with. If not, I would probably let it sit, given that you've taken the test twice already and both times your scores were pretty low. But it's a hard call.

Really, the best thing you can do is consult with your faculty advisor and ask for their opinion on what a reasonable course load and course selection might be. I think it is generally possible to take 3 courses + 1 language course, but it will keep you pretty busy. Especially in the first semester that might not be advisable. More to the point, you don't want to do something that your advisor/department disapproves of, so you should find out what they think is appropriate and follow their advice. That would be much better than trying to make a plan based on how some strangers in other fields/schools are structuring their schedules.

This. I have no idea why Johnny would ever choose to discuss his political opinions in his application (or interviews or meetings) one way or the other. That would be entirely unprofessional. And I don't really care where he went to undergrad, that's hardly relevant to a hiring decision.

Hi there, please don't post your questions multiple times. Your other 5 posts have been removed. If you want to get useful answers, it will help us to know why you want to pursue further studies of any kind. An MBA and a PhD would set you on very different career paths, and it's not clear that you have considered that or know which one you want. Given the current way you have framed your questions, my best advice would be not to apply for any degree until you actually figure out what it is that you want to do, and then what you need to do to get there. If that goal requires a PhD, then and only then does it make sense to pursue that degree. Liking to read books/papers about random topics is absolutely NOT a good reason to do a PhD in any of them. With this kind of reasoning for applying for a PhD, I would go ahead and agree with your friends that you are unlikely to get accepted. But I doubt that an MBA is what you need to change that. It may be that a second MA or professional courses are a better choice, or that you don't need any further education at all but instead you just need to start applying for whatever position(s) you want to have with your current qualifications and resume. Before you do anything else, you need to decide what you actually want.

Sounds like incompatible work styles or expectations. Not much you can do about it, I don't think it's ever a good idea to expect that you could change your advisor's work habits. As a first step, it's always good to have an explicit conversation about whatever it is that is bothering you, to see if there is an easy way to fix it. It's important that he knows you are unhappy, and it's better to head off these problems when they are small and young, before they grow into monsters. Depending on the conversation, I would usually advise one of two (and a half) solutions: find other ways to get feedback from him that work for both you and him (regularly scheduled (bi-)weekly in-person/Skype meetings, speaking at lab meetings, dropping by his office when necessary, texting him quick questions or results, etc), switch to a new advisor who you get along with better, or decide to make this situation work as is even if it's not ideal, because this is the best that you can have. This last suggestion is only half of a solution, the other half is actually learning to accept and live with the imperfect situation. If it continuously upsets you, that is not a good way to live. For this particular situation, I guess what I am missing is whether you are not getting necessary feedback at all, or just not in a form that you would like. If it's the latter, it might be easier to learn to adjust your expectations and manage the situation than if it is the former. I am also not sure what your field/lab situation is, but sometimes a solution might be to get feedback from a postdoc, a secondary advisor, or other lab mates. It might even be expected that you do this.

It's not really going to be possible for us to give you school suggestions based solely on your GPA and (estimated) GRE scores. For graduate school admissions, what really matter are your interests and how they fit with the schools you are applying to, as well as your ability to articulate that in your SOP. Also important: your LORs and writing sample. Your grades may make it more difficult for you to get past any school-side (official or unofficial) cutoffs, if they exist, so they may keep you out of a certain school, but the SOP, LORs, and writing sample are what's going to get you in. FWIW a 3.66 is above any cutoff anyone is going to have, and as for the GRE, the quantitative reasoning section is more important than the verbal section for most linguistics programs, especially for international applicants who also submit a TOEFL score. Some schools (including MIT and a few others) don't even ask for GRE scores these days. In addition, the fact that your degree is not in linguistics is not in itself a problem. Linguistics is a fairly small and inter-disciplinary field that accepts students with diverse backgrounds, precisely because a lot of schools don't have undergraduate linguistics programs. The challenge will be to articulate how it is that you know that you want -- and are prepared for -- studying a degree in linguistics, and what your interests are. That is difficult for everyone, but even more so for someone with less of an extensive education in linguistics. If you can explain in detail what it is that you are interested in, how you know that this is what you want, and why the school you chose is a good place to support your interests, you will be well under way to a successful application. This means that the choice of schools should be motivated by your interests, not your grades, and therefore we can't just look at your GRE or GPA scores and say anything useful. If you can define a set of questions that interest you, a good first step might be trying to identify where the people who work on these problems teach and applying there; a second step is identifying where some of those people's former advisees are employed, and looking at those departments. You can also look through the LSA website to find schools more systematically. And if you have specific interests you can share with us, maybe some of us will have suggestions (though personally L2 acquisition is outside what I do, so I probably won't be able to help).

I think you do want to explain very briefly, not going into details at all but just acknowledging that you attended this school and saying you left because of a bad research fit (or some other similarly vague but not negative statement). Don't blame anyone and don't sound like you're attempting to cover up. Also don't say anything your advisor will strongly object to, because there is a good chance s/he will say something different, and there is a good chance s/he'll get asked. In fact, in the ideal case you'll have a strong LOR from your advisor saying you're great, it was just a bad research fit but s/he expects you to be super successful somewhere else. Not having a LOR from your advisor will raise a red flag that it would be better to avoid (and if your advisor is not supportive, it would be very very helpful if someone else from your program would write you a letter, and -- again -- it'd be good if that letter cite something about a bad fit between you and your advisor as the reason for your leaving, as opposed to poor performance or some other serious problem. If you are worried about the U grades, you could include that in the short statement about this program, but it'd be better if a relevant LOR writer simply explains that the Us are a formal consequence of you withdrawing and not a reflection on the work. You also deal with this by talking about the research in detail and about how you plan to extend it or build on it in your next program.

Is your advisor going to take on new students soon? Is there any reason for you to be concerned about the students who left (are the reasons ones that could potentially be relevant for you)? If you get along with your advisor and like the hands-off advising style, maybe there are other ways to fill the quiet of the lab (like classes during the semester, inviting others to happy hour, other on- or off-campus groups). It's often the case that things quiet down over the summer and pick back up during the semester, so it's a matter of learning to find the company you need outside of you lab and/or department. If the problem is with the advising style more generally, then yes, maybe you joined the wrong lab. Just based on your post it's hard to know.

Best advice for any kind of templatic writing: find people who have *received* whatever award/grant/fellowship/thing you are applying for -- or at least someone who has applied before -- and ask to see their application. Use your connections. Your advisor will know people and whatever it is you're applying for, it's highly unlikely that you are the first one to try it. I don't know what this research proposal is for, but I bet other students in your program have written similar things in the past. Don't be shy, but later on remember this stage in your life and pay the generosity forward. Once you have something to work with, stick to the winning template. Have as many other experienced profs read it as possible. And find out if there are any institution internal deadlines beyond just the official one. Plan accordingly. It will take longer to write than you think it will.

In the context of the F1 visa, this usually happens to people who study certain subjects that involve knowledge concerning sensitive technology, but it can happen for a variety of additional reasons -- and that can be anything from if they suspect terrorism activity to some simple mistake in the information that you provided, or a random supervisor deciding to pick up your case to do a quality control assessment. It is impossible to know in advance if you will be considered to have the relevant knowledge that would trigger further administrative processing, so for anyone else reading this, the lesson is simply to get started as soon as possible, to allow for the possible delay. Most cases are supposed to be processed within 60 days, but unfortunately they don't give any guarantees or assurances. And although there is a place to keep track of your application on the USCIS website, it's not entirely clear to me that they actually update that page. There is also no way to expedite the process. Unfortunately that may mean that you miss your Aug 22 start date, and even more unfortunately, no one here can do anything to reassure you that that is not the case or to even tell you how likely that is. If you want to read more, a quick google search for "f1 administrative processing" and related searches bring back a good selection of sites on the first page of the search.

It seems that you are not getting any answers, perhaps because it's not entirely what the question is. I have to admit that I am confused about the context for this potential email and what you want to accomplish with it. Maybe you can clarify.

You may choose to format it to fit on one page for aesthetic and similar reasons, but in general there is no rule that the CV has to be just one or two pages. Many will be much longer, especially as you gain more experience. So the goal is not to "pad" it to look longer or more substantial than it is (that is easily detectable and very much not appreciated), but if you do have content that exceeds one page (or two pages, or any other fixed number), that is not a problem. You should make choices that maximize the utility of the CV for the relevant current purpose (e.g. content A maybe be more relevant for purpose X than purpose Y, so you may move it to the end of the CV or leave it out altogether; you might combine "presentations" and "publications" early on if you don't have enough entries in each category separately for them to look substantial; you may not separate peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications early on; or you may not separate posters from talks; it really depends, and unless there is a set and agreed upon way of doing things in your field, likely many choices will be acceptable, as long as you are not trying to deceive anyone and are clear about the content).

In general I would advise against going to a school where there is only one researcher with interests similar to yours. Regardless of tenure, what if that person gets sick or leaves, or you two just don't get along (which does happen!)? Even if you do get along and everything is wonderful, you will need to be able to put together a committee for your dissertation/thesis, and you will need to have at least three people who can write you LORs if you want to apply to any job or further education. Having just one person is not enough. As for the question of having an assistant professor as your advisor, there are good and bad sides to it. There is always some risk that s/he will not get tenure and will have to leave before you graduate, and then you are stuck. There is also an option that they are a rising star and get poached by a better school. Assistant professors will often have a better understanding of what it's like to be a student and to be on the job market, because they have had those experiences more recently, and they may be more driven to publish, because they are on the tenure track. They may be more easy to relate to and (as a sweeping and not exceptionless generalization) they may be more supportive of diverse applicants than some older professors. On the other hand, they will be less experienced and may take time to adjust to advising, and they may be more demanding than you'd like in terms of work hours -- so there are potential good and bad aspects of each option. At the end of the day all that matters is what the particular person you are considering is like. You should talk to them and to their current students to get a sense of whether you'd get along with this person.

Yes, it should be fine to write a new and very different SOP. I assume nothing you'll say now will explicitly contradict what you said in the past, just that you might emphasize different aspects of your past experience or that you might have developed new interests based on whatever it is that you've been doing and thinking about since last year. That is not a problem at all even if they do remember your old application (which they might, if you were close to the top last time, and wouldn't be a bad thing) or look it up (which is possible but less likely).

I agree that it would be advisable to address this obvious red flag in your application, especially since it sounds like you had a real issue that you were dealing with and you would not just be making excuses. There are two (broadly speaking) ways of addressing such issues. One is to do it yourself and the other is to have a LOR writer do it for you (or some combination of the two). If you do it yourself, you would write a short (1-2 sentence) statement that would acknowledge that you had low grades in UG and say something vague about personal trouble (or whatever is the appropriate wording for your case); the goal would simply be to express that this was an anomaly and not a reflection of your true abilities, and that it's behind you now and will not affect your graduate work. You would try to keep it positive and move on to discussing successes and future goals, not dwell on bad things in the past and not blame anyone. This can go in your SOP or in an addendum; some applications have special space just for things like this. So where it goes would depend on the particular application. The other option is to have a LOR writer address this. Obviously this would require you having someone around who you trust to do this for you, and may mean that a few more details are communicated to adcoms. The advantage is that explanations like this are usually better received if they come from a professor who can put them in perspective and say that s/he is still highly supportive of your application, despite the imperfections. So, the choice is up to you and it depends to some extent on whether there is someone around who you trust to help you. If you do in fact have someone you trust to help you with this in a LOR, I would also suggest consulting with them on whether you should also include a statement of your own somewhere in your application and on how to phrase it.

I would assume that any PhD application would expect a LOR from the Masters advisor at some point, probably not at the initial contact stage but when an application is submitted (and that there would be concern if such a LOR were not submitted), but I don't see why that is a problem. To my understanding @Zanela123's advisor did not tell her not to apply to other programs or speak to other professors, but instead simply gave her advice about when to reach out to POIs and said that the fall is a better time. It would be exceedingly unlikely that he would refuse to recommend her just because she chose not to follow his advice on this particular point. If that were an issue, there are probably already bigger problems in the advising relationship to worry about.

This is a question for someone at your program. There is no way we can answer it here. In general, if a skill set or some courses are required for a certain job or career choice, it would probably be advisable for you to learn it. Or at least it is possible that not having the relevant skills could limit the jobs you might be a strong contender for. In that case, it would seem smarter to take the courses so that you are not hindered by their absence from your transcript later. That said, you should really consult with someone who actually knows your program and the field you are planning to enter, who can tell you if the particular courses you are considering are actually important or if there are other things that employers care about. So -- talk to your advisor, grad secretary, or your program's DGS.

Wow, it sounds like you are over-thinking this. You advisor gave you advice about when it would be best to contact POIs. If you had asked me I would have said the same, because a lot of professors are on vacation now and haven't begun planning for next year. This is obviously not to say that no one has, just that on average you'll probably get a better response rate and catch people when they are better informed if you reach out in the early fall than in the middle of summer. Unless your advisor expressly forbade you from contacting other professors (which I doubt!), I really don't see the problem in telling him that you have a meeting set up with someone who you met at a conference last month. Don't psych yourself out about "going against his advice" or about someone else "spilling the beans". Relax, there was an opportunity because of a conference, you took it, and it looks like it worked out for you. Just tell him matter of factly that this is happening and ask for his advice for preparing. Don't act like there is anything wrong, because there isn't.

@charlemagne88 answer my question, I'll answer yours. The OP did not in fact ask for your opinion about their choice. Moreover, your opinion is *not* "the hard truth". It is your opinion. What the OP did ask for is advice:

What makes you think I'm a guy? I am also not sure why you think that you are in a position to judge someone whose life circumstances you don't know at all. There are better ways of conveying your *opinion* than calling someone's actions "ridiculous," "insane," or "dumb".

Well, if your program doesn't require you to be physically on campus after you advance to candidacy, the easiest solution would be to continue to be affiliated with your current university but write your dissertation remotely. If there are teaching requirements, maybe there is a way to pile them up in the coming semester and leave when you finish them. It would be important to have a supportive advisor if you are going to successfully do this. If there is a local university where you'll be and you can find a professor who would be willing to serve on your committee, that would help a lot in making sure you actually stay on track, because it can be easy to get lost when you're alone and away from your program. If you actually want to start over at a new program, I think it really would be starting over. I can't think of a program that would agree to award you a PhD when your entire coursework was done at a different program. Some might transfer some credits. Again, if you have connections with someone local, and especially if your advisor is willing to vouch for you that you are not leaving your program because of any academic difficulty, there might be an arrangement where you don't have to go through the normal application process and maybe you would be able to skip some of the coursework at the new program. Otherwise, there is a decent chance that you'll be treated just like any other applicant,* and then, if admitted, like any other first-year student with all the same requirements. On a more personal note, you don't specify field or career goals, but if the goal is academia, the lack of (geographical) flexibility may make your chances of getting a job lower than they would otherwise be, possibly significantly so. If you are hoping for a non-academic job, this would be a good time to ask yourself whether a PhD is needed for the kinds of jobs you want, or whether an MA is sufficient. If an MA is sufficient, with two+ years of a graduate education, you may be able to "Master out" of the program and just get a job near your boyfriend. *Actually, at my program you would be at a disadvantage, they don't like to take students who are already in an advanced stage at another graduate program.