t_ruth

Meet in the middle. Discuss one primary, but then say how you could also see yourself working with X or Y other people and why. This might be especially important if your primary wants to take on an advisee, but they don't have funding...you could be in the running to be advised by your primary and do an assistantship with X or Y.

I applied to 10 (11 years ago) and got into all but two. The benefit in applying to so many was the variance in funding and the ability to leverage funding offers against each other.

Given your background, I'm very curious what your driving research questions are..

I would check out Learning Sciences programs. You can study media in Psych programs, Sociology programs, Communications programs, probably more. You likely want to find someone whose research or perspective you relate to...have you read much in this area that resonates with you? I'm in Learning Sciences and study digital environments...feel free to PM me for more specific advice.

You've already received some good advice, but one other thing you might want to consider is to focus on people doing research using the framework you want to use, but on a different population. For example, you might find a PI whose work you like who researches university belonging, or the application of student support services, but hasn't yet applied it to military or veteran populations. You could be offering a way for them to expand their work that they hadn't considered. The research "match" is something that can be argued and justified...it isn't something that is either there or isn't.

I work exactly at the intersection of education, psychology, and data science/statistics. PM me if you want and we can chat!

That stinks. I'm sorry you had to go through this. It is too common a story unfortunately. I think the most likely scenario is that they would only call/email the rotten PI if they were friends with her (or at least friendly with her)...and if they are friends with her, probably not the type of lab you would want to work in.

Hi all, I know I've said this on a few threads, but I wanted to post to get some more eyes on this and urge those of you interested in developmental, cognitive, social, experimental, or quantitative psychology to consider educational psychology and/or learning sciences. In our field, we are able to investigate any of those areas or a combination of all of those areas--one thing I love about this field! In addition, the job market for Ed Psych and Learning Sciences expands easily beyond academia--we are hired by think tanks, research firms, school districts, government agencies, and curriculum and software designers. The methods training you will receive will likely be stronger than that in most psychology programs (often on par with quant psych), making you more appealing for some of these alt-ac jobs. It is common to do consulting in these areas even as a student. In addition, our faculty market is robust. We are able to earn faculty positions in Education Schools/Departments, some Psychology Departments, and also as leads for Centers of Teaching and Learning, or as faculty in professional schools, such as nursing or medicine (hiring Ed Psych faculty in these positions is a growing trend). Lastly, the grant funding for Ed Psych/Learning Sciences is plentiful. It is common for graduate students to work on federally-funded projects and to gain experience grant writing and managing grants. As faculty, we often lead our own federal grants or are asked to partner with those in the sciences to serve as evaluator, outreach developer, or co-PI. If you are interested, feel from to post questions here or PM me. I have been faculty in Ed Psych/Learning Sciences for over five years. Thanks!

Agree that asking about international students in particular is a good idea. You might also say something like: Dear Professor <last name>, I was excited to see you are taking graduate students for next year. I am extremely interested in your research, especially <detail here>. In particular, I am interested in <some extension of their work or something related to their work that you would like to pursue>. Does this seem a good fit for your lab? Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you, <your name>

When I teach a first-year doctoral seminar I have my students do an activity. I have them write ten "I wonder" questions every week...I wonder whether...I wonder how...I wonder why. At first, I tell them don't even worry about the topic. You can say, "I wonder whether my dog knows when I come home from work." It can be just anything. However, these tend to converge around a topic area in their field/sub-field. I also encourage them to ask these questions when reading academic articles. Think about what you might do if you conducted the study--what would you ask that is different? What would you want to follow up on? For those who are in a tighter timeline (like trying to decide a research interest in a few months), I might increase the frequency of these questions to 5-10 a day instead of 10 a week. Keep a journal of them. Both the content and the form (e.g., asking whether vs. how) will be telling regarding both your research interests and the epistemic frame with which you will approach your work. Best of luck!

Happy to offer advice if you want to PM...

Right. Most places here will expect students to at least have a general idea of the sub-topic they want to study. You don't need a research plan or even research question, but what you have formed is good enough and then maybe some specific ideas you *might* like to explore that you could talk about or relate to the faculty member you are interested in working with.

Ok. That sounds like a PhD is more appropriate than an EdD. You will want to search for articles that interest you related to your topic and then pay attention to the faculty members who are authors on those articles (look at all the authors--not just the first author). Good luck!

This is a great thing to think about early! Unfortunately, the answer is "it depends." It depends heavily on your specific sub-field of education. In Ed Psych, for example, it is become very common for PhD grads to take one-four year postdocs, but in Ed Policy or Curriculum and Instruction, this is less common. Comparing the latter two, in Ed Policy, competitive new PhDs will need five or six good pubs, whereas in C&I, one or two (or even none) might work. A lot of this is about the time it takes to complete the kind of research and the other competition for positions. For example, Ed Psych PhDs also compete with Dev and Cog Psych PhDs for the same positions in Ed Schools (and postdocs are very common in those fields). Ed Policy PhDs can do quick work on secondary datasets, whereas C&I PhDs often do in-classroom work in partnership with schools, which takes a LONG time. Also, it is increasingly important to show that your work is fundable and you have good potential of earning funding, so aside from publications, strong applicants have fellowships, small grants, involvement in PIs grants, etc. And of course, one cannot underestimate the power of connections. Working with famous advisors (or their less famous academic offspring--still in their lineage) can open doors. So too can doing your own networking at conferences and in other ways. These things aren't necessarily right, but they are the reality of the situation. Happy to provide a more targeted answer if you provide your sub-field.

You can 100% make the switch--many come to Ed PhDs from other fields (and/or with limited research experience)! Yes, this will likely be harder in programs where classes are minimal in the PhD and the focus is on research. They may not view your application favorably or require you to have a different degree before applying, but they also might teach those things through an apprentice ship model just as well (or better) as you would learn in classes. Is there a particular reason you are applying to these programs? Is it that your niche area of interest has PIs scattered throughout the world? If that is the case, then reach out and have a conversation, because it is likely that getting PhD students in that niche area is also difficult and the PIs will help you overcome any background-related hurdles. If it is just that you think it would be fun to study in X country, then that will be a harder case to make. You can also start getting research experience and maybe even taking some classes now. With so much online this fall, it might be a good time to take an intro to research methods grad course as a non-degree-seeking student. You can also reach out to PIs whose work you are interested in and ask if you can volunteer in their lab. Classes/degrees are great, but there is nothing like hands-on experience.

Agree w/EvolvedGradBlog above. Depends on what kind of administration you are interested in though. An EdD is the right degree if you are interested in yourself becoming an administrator, but if you are interested in *researching* school administration, a PhD is the right program. Which is it?

If you are looking for a volunteer position, this is an opportunity to expand beyond your local area. Many labs (mine included) are doing everything completely virtual, including running new studies that require RAs.

So great to see Dev Psych PhDs talking about a focus on Education You may find some Learning Sciences/Ed Psych programs that fit as well if you are looking to broaden your list.

Not sure if you are still looking for opportunities, but depending on your area of research, I might have some leads for you. You can message me.

There isn't an easy percentage to give. If you do a Masters with a PI and you do a good job, they will move heaven and earth to make sure you get into the PhD program.

Depends on the field. In my field, we love when our MS students stay for the PhD, because we invest a lot in them and it is great to have continuity. This of course assumes they do well in the MS. It's a good proving ground.

This varies highly from university to university. My university has CT positions that have very similar salaries (if not exactly the same) to TT positions. They aren't short-term contracts, and they have their own tenure process. Also, at faculty meetings, I've seen little hierarchy in how CT vs. TT faculty are treated. Here, CT faculty are professionals who focus on teaching or research only, TT are professionals who focus on the typical combo. This is very different from other universities I've been at, where there is a much bigger difference in terms of prestige, salary, etc.

It's very difficult to write worthwhile non-empirical articles as a jr. scholar, even post-PhD. Concentrate on using your content classes to write lit reviews for papers that you write for your method classes. If you can coordinate well, you may be able to get one paper out of every 3-4 classes (2-3 content classes and 1-2 method classes). Another more reasonable thing to do with class papers is turn them into small grant applications. I know many people who have had luck with this.

One thing to consider is that although reviewers are generally blind to who the authors are, editors are not. It might benefit you to have your advisor/senior author on the paper when you send it out to review. It's a sad fact, but true.

The reputation for Teachers College is mixed. From my understanding, they are a bit of degree mill, so let in almost anyone. That said, there are also amazing faculty and so a degree from there can be a strength (it just depends on what you took, who you worked with, and other elements of your application). In general, clinical is usually more competitive than developmental. What is your ultimate career goal? What research questions do you have?