fuzzylogician

Be careful and verify this: - International students are limited and where/how many hours they can work. - Verify that you are indeed the one who will get priority in being assigned teaching opportunities. I.e., if there are more people who want to teach than available hours, what happens? - Verify that you can teach (as opposed to TA), if that matters to you. Some schools will only allow PhD holders to be instructor of record (salary might be different between teaching and TAing). - Ask about salary, tuition remission, and benefits. Keep in mind that some cities have high living costs, and that some schools have high tuition costs. Figure out what holds for your situation. And also keep in mind that graduating early may not be the best move. It means you'll have less time to work on your research and your dissertation. You'll most likely be less productive than people who took 5-6 years to finish, and that may mean you'll have a hard time on the job market. On the other hand, having to take on a significant teaching load will also slow you down, because teaching can be very time consuming, so you'll want to know exactly how much teaching you'll have to do to make ends meet. Getting good postdocs is not guaranteed. Even visiting prof positions with a high teaching load are competitive. I don't mean to bring you down, but make sure you think through what your plans mean. It's hard to think about what will happen 5 years from now, but don't put yourself at a disadvantage before you even start, if you can avoid it.

I'm not sure if there are regular posters here who would know. It's really a question for UA, not us. It's a totally fair one, too, so I don't you have anything to worry about if you choose to email a POI and simply ask them. I'd do that even if you do get an answer here, because having decent funding would be a critical part of choosing where to apply and where to attend. The answer could be anything from "we can't officially guarantee 5th year funding, but we've been able to provide it to all students in the past 20 years" to "students are able to teach/TA to cover tuition and get benefits in their 5th year" to "yeah, you'll have to figure it out."

Alright everyone, This is an official warning, and the only one that you will get. ANYONE who escalates the situation, and this includes in posts on the board or in PMs, will get their posting privileges (temporarily) revoked. We are not going to play the "he said, she said/but they started it" game. You have generated over half a dozen reports in the last hour, and that is going to cost us valuable hours of our time to sort out. We are running out of patience. This thread and the other one you started will remain locked at least until tomorrow, and we will reevaluate then.

I, at least, wasn't really addressing my comments at Joan Calamezzo in particular, and I agree with everything you said about advising relationships that might be very successful despite the advisor not being great with email (though my opinion has somewhat changed since I've graduated and moved away, and chasing an advisor to get LORs on time and to work on joint papers has become exponentially more difficult). I do want to take seriously the OP's feeling regarding this particular situation, because in my experience if you feel that someone isn't right for you, for whatever reason, that's not something to ignore and hope that it will go away. Someone who won't read your materials, isn't conscious of your deadlines, and won't reciprocate correspondence sounds like someone I wouldn't want to work with, personally. Maybe others can find ways to make it work, and that's fine too. And more importantly, there is no obligation to wait for an unresponsive person and not contact anyone else in the same department, so that's the biggest point.

We don't ban people just because others disagree with them. Even if everyone disagrees with them. If they are trolling, that is something you can bring to our attention and we can see if we agree and if so, do something about it. The best thing you can do is ignore the person. You do not have to reply, even if you strongly disagree with what they say. If you're not aware of it, there is a "ignore user" functionality that you might want to use. You can get it by hovering over the user's profile. Then you won't see their replies and so they can't upset you.

Don't ask someone who you don't trust. If you ask someone who you don't trust and they give you a bad letter, you might not get admitted and in that case you won't have the chance to exercise your FERPA right to view your letter, so not having waived you right to view the letter will not matter. If you get in anyway, you're done, you got in. Once you're in school, you'll get your letters from your grad school professors, who will be the ones who will know you and your work the best, and there won't be a reason to get them from your old profs, especially if you don't even trust them. If you get a good letter, that's nice to read, but there is no gain to be had. But there is potentially something to lose from not waiving your rights. FWIW, for fellowships/grants and job applications, you never get to see your letters, unless a prof volunteers to show them to you. Such is life.

From the FAQ: Should I waive my right to view my letter? Yes. Your letter will be taken more seriously if your recommenders are free to write their honest opinion of you without fear of retaliation on your part. If you do not waive your right to view the letters, they may be assigned less weight or even ignored by the adcom. Some professors will show you a copy of the letter anyway, and many others might not. You should only ask professors who you trust to write strong, positive letters on your behalf, and expect that you may never see them. This is the general sentiment. Whether this holds for the particular profs at the particular schools you'll apply to, no one knows. That's why it's advisable to just do it. Also keep in mind that not waiving your right to see the letter means something different than people tend to think. If you are admitted to a school, FERPA would normally allow you to view your student records, which would normally include things such as LORs. Waiving your right means that you won't be able to see the LORs in your file. *Either way, if you are not admitted and enrolled at a school, you don't have a right to access your file there*. So this has a much more limited effect than you might think.

My advice: don't take crap from people. Don't work with advisors who won't give you the time of day or who you just clash with because of a personality mismatch that's beyond anyone's control. This "PhD advisors are all assholes, it's how it is and it'll teach you to appreciate the time they do give you" is bullshit. There are certainly assholes out there, but there is no reason why you should work with them. Find someone who you enjoy working with and who gives you the kind of attention you want. Don't feel bad about it, either. You are doing exactly the right thing. Contact the other guy now and see how this plays out. If he is the only option at that school, you might apply and only list him in your SOP, or depending on your other choices you might think it's too risky and not even bother. I would probably lean towards "too risky" because the unresponsive prof is still likely to affect your life, as one of only two people at the school (as I understand it) who work in your area, even if he is not your advisor. This is assuming that the relationship with "other guy" stays good throughout your 5+ years in your program, which is also not guaranteed. Having just one person is risky. So, that's something to keep in mind and try to figure out: how much would you have to interact with the unresponsive prof and how much influence would they have on you? Would you be ok with that?

A postdoc is kind of a weird status, but in many places a postdoc is actually considered a university employee (and at others something like a student), so I'm not all that surprised that if a university considers postdocs employees, then they get whatever benefits other employees who've worked there for the same amount of time would get.

This varies greatly and will depend on the insurance offered by your university. In most cases I know of, dental isn't covered, but sometimes there will be a policy that students can purchase at some discount price. Again, coverage will vary greatly. You'll have to see what your options are and what the particular dentist or network you'd be associated would want to do, but we can't know what that would be. Honestly, if I had to guess, I bet it'd be easier to stick with your current dentist and continue treatment when you go home to visit (if that's possible), since an MS is a fairly short degree. More than that, though, I don't think we can really tell.

I don't know if/when you sent the email, but today is Friday the 11th, and the applications are due Tuesday, the 15th. With the weekend, your advisor probably won't look at your email until the day before the deadline, if that. I can easily imagine this email leaving a bad impression. It's one thing to email 2-3 weeks before the application is due. It's quite another to email 2-3 days before the deadline.

Interestingly enough, no one who responded here is from the sciences. We also never said publications weren't important. We are questioning what it looks like for a final-year PhD student to suddenly leave his/her department to spend a semester taking courses and presenting at another university. Your dissertation project is presumably well under way to being completed, and should be what you devote your time to now. You are anyway probably too late for arranging an official visit for the upcoming semester, which will start in less than a month at some places and about two months at others, because you'll need funding and a visa (not to mention agreement from the university to host you, and probably a host), and I'm sure visiting students for the semester have already been chosen. Are you thinking about visiting next year, after you will have completed your PhD? Then you are not a student anymore, and most places I know won't be able to host you, because you'll need a home university (that is, a job or postdoc) to be visiting from.

Having good publications is important, but it's not enough. You want to known as someone active, who gives eloquent and interesting talks. People need to know you, and preferably also like you. They'll give you a postdoc because they want to have you around, because either you or your advisor have the right connections to find a place for you. You want people to associate the name on the papers they read with a face and a personality. Unlike TT jobs (or at least to a lesser extent), postdocs are often more informal, so there isn't a formal search process that universities have to go through. If someone wants to have you there, there are ways of finding the money to make it happen. If no one knows you exist, they won't want you around. Likewise, even if someone has heard of your publications, how should they know that you are graduating and looking for a postdoc? If you have a presence and you make it known that you are looking, then things might happen. The point of attending conferences is to make yourself known to people who you might want to hire you. You do this at the talks, but also at the coffee breaks and the lunches/dinners and party.

It wasn't clear to me from your post if you would consider going even though you'd have to cover at least some of the expenses out of pocket. If this is not the case, then you need to say that in your email too. I think it's totally fair, and they should understand.

Dear Prof X, Thank you for the interview invitation! I am very excited about visiting Awesome U and the possibility of attending the ABC program next year. Unfortunately, DATE is not a possible time for me to travel, as my MSc exam has been scheduled on that day. Would it be possible to visit on another date? If not, I would be very happy to make myself available for a Skype interview. Thank you for your understanding, piglet33

Are you hoping to get a job in Europe or in the US? At least in my field, I can imagine it being helpful to have connections in the US if that's where you want to get a job. Being a visiting student isn't the only way to build those connections, but if you can successfully start an advising relationship with someone influential and are able to sustain it once you leave so that you have a letter of recommendation from them and access to their network, that could help. That's something that I imagine is harder to do by just meeting people at conferences. But in general, being visible at conferences and such is probably more important.

You should address this question to your course instructor or TA. This forum is not about helping students with their homework.

In general, you never know if you'll solve a problem or get stuck. TakeruK described a reasonable thought process. It's hard to be more specific without knowing more details. One thing I'll add is that it often helps me to know how "stuck" I really am to talk to others. Even just formulating the question and thought process helps, and if multiple smart people who I've shown the problem to are stumped, that tells you something. If they have suggestions, then I have new leads to follow and I can figure out what I think about them. Also, sometimes taking a break and doing something else for a while can really help. I think your question comes in the context of "I have too many things to do already, is it worth it to work hard at solving this problem, when I have all these other things I could be doing." That's a hard one. It depends on so many factors, such as what else you have going on, what stage of your career you're in, if there are upcoming deadlines for anything, what potential outcomes you expect the project to have, if all goes well, and more. It's easy to overcommit, so getting the balance right is a learning process. I think it's important to be strategic and to prioritize according to what makes sense for your career right now. I personally need to have multiple projects going on, I can't really do just one. When I get stuck in one place, I have other things happening that I can move to and not get stuck for too long. The way I choose what to work on often ends up being decided by external factors. I have a deadline for X application/grant, and it would be good to have Y paper out by then to show skill Z. Or there is a conference deadline coming up with theme ABC at a nifty place I want to visit. Or a co-author is really into working on a joint paper, so my attention goes there. Or I'm teaching about X in class now, so it's convenient to work on a paper in this area, too. It really depends. Right now I'm working with monthly to-do lists that I revisit and adjust every month, that try to take into account the other things I have to juggle (such as teaching, service, my life). Some papers I would really love to be working on have to get postponed to a later time, because it's just not feasible to do them now. I try to take good notes so that I finally get back to them I know what my thought process was and what needs to happen next, but I accept that I can't do everything that I want.

^Yep, describe the ordering in the SOP, and add a footnote to the paper saying "authors contributed equally." If you have a professor who is aware of your contributions to the paper and knows about your arrangements with your classmates, it'd be helpful to have her/him describe that in a LOR.

Most applicants for PhD programs won't have external funding sources, so you have nothing to worry about if that's your goal. You'll most likely be funded by the program. For professional programs and many MAs, you won't be funded by the program and so you'll have to either find external funding or take out loans. To my knowledge, most applicants end up taking on some debt, even if they manage to find some sources of funding. Schools admit applicants under these circumstances all the time.

Why can't you send transcripts and scores before submitting the application? You can send them any time. Whenever the first supporting materials arrive at the school, they will open a file for you. As more materials arrive, they will add them to the file. When the application is submitted, the materials will be associated with the application.

I'd choose the professor who knows you better, because he will be able to write a stronger and more detailed letter than the other professor, famous as he may be. If the schools allow it, you might be able to submit a letter from the famous prof as a third, supplemental letter.

If it wasn't mentioned then it's not required. It might still be a good idea, just to ensure that nothing gets lost or misplaced, but most likely it'll be just fine either way.

It's not going to ruin your chances. All it is is the instructions for the SOP, followed by the SOP. Any sane person would skip the instructions and read the essay. No harm, no foul.

Putting the name and program you are applying to on your submitted documents will help staff and the admissions committee keep track of documents, in case anything gets lost or misplaced. In most cases, that will likely not happen. Your documents were uploaded as part of your application, and will therefore be associated with it. In all likelihood, failing to put your name on the documents will have no effect on your admissions chances, one way or the other. (Of course, no one here can make you any promises. But it is extremely unlikely that this will get your application summarily tossed.)