waddle

Although I am entering as a new Ph.d candidate this year, I remember very well my MA program, and so I am basically taking some of my own advice, which I will note for you guys here in case you'd like to follow my example.

1. I always contact my profs in advance for any readings or assignments I can start in the summer. I am in English, so this is usually a BIG timesaver. During my MA program, I taught for a program which required us to read and lead discussions on a reading packet (which had over 500 pages!!). I read and took notes on the packet in the summer, so that when the fall semester hit, all i had to do was look over my old notes and I was ready to teach. Right now, I've already begun contacting profs, and they have been giving me suggested readings. I have the summer off, so I am planning to hit the books and get ahead, which has always been the secret to my success (I rarely get too stressed out).

2. TIME MANAGEMENT. Let me say that again: TIME MANAGEMENT!!!!! When I get an assignment (for an essay, say), I don't wait until a week before it's due to get started. I IMMEDIATELY go to the library (sometimes directly after the class) and start compiling the materials I will need. I keep a detailed planner keeping track of what assignments are due when. With good time management, you don't have to do any all-nighters or be miserable because you don't have any free time. Work hard, work efficiently, and you WILL have time for fun in your life, even in your first year. In my first year as an MA student, I taught 9 hours a week for the linguistics department, making all my own lesson plans. I also took 3 full seminars. And yet, I don't remember being particularly stressed out. I set aside my Saturday mornings for lesson planning, and I'd plan my teaching for the entire week, setting aside all the materials I would need and making sure to make any required copies. Then the rest of the weekend would be for homework, research, etc., but I'd often go to a cafe and take time to go to the gym or take a walk. For me, grad school has always been WAY easier than working a 9 to 5 in a cubicle somewhere. In grad school, you make your own hours. If you're nocturnal, you can work all night if you want. If you're a morning person, you can get up at 4am to study. Perhaps the freedom of it all is what gets people into trouble....

3. Do NOT procrastinate. In undergrad, you could get away with cramming the day before the test, or staying up all night the night before an assignment was due, busting out a 5-page essay in 8 hours. In grad school, your profs will KNOW sloppy work for what it is. Get working on stuff early.

4. Communicate. You may not like many of your profs. In fact, a great many of them are arrogant a-holes. They may be condescending, or treat you like dirt. This is irrelevant. You have to put your personal feelings aside and communicate with them in a professional manner. I absolutely loathed several of my profs in grad school, but I smiled and did my best to visit them at office hours and ask them for advice. Trust me. It works.

5. Make sure the people on your committee are people you respect, and who will help you. Don't just get anybody who agrees to be on your committee. Be very, very careful. These are the people who will approve or deny your thesis/dissertation. You want people who will help you revise, or guide you along the way, not a prof who is already mentoring 8 other people, is never around, is 8 months pregnant, is near death or chronically ill, is head of a department and exceedingly busy, etc. etc. etc. You are going to want to show your work in progress and get guidance. Make sure the people you choose are the right people.

And of course, take time to relax and have a little fun. Audit an undergraduate course in something that interests you (sorry, I'm a nerd, that's what I do for "fun"). Go camping for a weekend when you're ahead on your work. Go study in an outdoor cafe--get Out of the house/library, for god's sake! Life is short. If you're not having a good time, you're doing something wrong.

Can some of you please elaborate on navigating department politics. What to look for, who to ask, what absolutely not to do, horror stories, whatever

Politics: Academics are a genteel bunch, generally speaking. They usually won't say anything outright negative about other people (partially because it's such a small world and that person might be on a committee you're on next year - or even better, on your grant or tenure review committee). Look for the veiled references, the awkward silences, the pointed omissions. Ask current graduate students, too, before you tie yourself to someone because they are far more willing to be frank with you about your advisors.

As a grad student, having a powerful advocate for you within the department is great. Assistant professors can be awesome but they generally cannot fulfill the role of a powerful advocate. My advisor is an assistant professor, but I have another official advisor who is a full professor and an informal advisor who's associate. Their contacts in the university have been invaluable in helping me through some bureaucratic nightmares. One example: I TAed in the department my full professor advisor is appointed in and partway through the semester, I was told I would not be compensated (long story). I fought the good fight with financial aid on my own for weeks getting nowhere. I mentioned it to my advisor and within two weeks the money was in my account. Work with people who can advocate for you.

My advice:

-I'm gonna go the opposite of snarky and say *don't* volunteer for stuff. It depends on your department culture, but volunteering for too much can add way too much on your plate.

-Don't lose yourself. Grad school has a way of taking you over and taking the joy out of a lot of the things you would otherwise rather be doing than work, because you feel guilty about not doing work just about any time that you aren't doing work. Find a way to beat that feeling and maintain who you are. Hold onto cherished hobbies, read a pleasure book every now and then, allow yourself mindless reality television or whatever your guilt is.

-Corollary to above: Decide right now what you are willing to sacrifice for this degree and the requisite career after it. What is important to you? If you have to list it out on paper, do that. Now think about which of those things you are willing to give up in exchange for quality of your work and career. Good research takes time; great research takes more time; excellent research takes even more time and being a superstar takes most of your time. Realize that there is NO shame in realizing early on that you do not want to be a superstar.

-Sometimes, the best advisors aren't the ones with the closest research to your own but the ones you get along with the best, and who are really dedicated to getting you up and out.

-A paper will never be good if it's not done.

-If you are interested in non-academic jobs...find out what you need to do to get them, and do those things. Don't let anyone (advisors, colleagues, etc.) browbeat you or persuade you to drop your non-academic aspirations, if you know that the professor life is not for you. I've found that advisors have unrealistic expectations about the ease with which their students will get tt jobs after grad school.

-If you have health insurance and need to see a therapist, use it. You'd probably be surprised to know how many people in your department are battling mental health issues and talking to therapists. (Everyone in my cohort is or was.) Grad school threatens that mental health. Work on it.

-I agree with the chair advice. I already had chronic back pain when I came to grad school and grad school has made it worse. However, a decent chair helps a lot. I didn't have the money to spring for a $300 desk chair (that will be the next step though, maybe next year) but I did get a $70 one from Wal-Mart that gives me pretty decent support. I can't sit in it forever, but 4-6 hours is usually all I want to sit there for anyway and I can usually get through that pretty comfortably. (The education school here has EXCELLENT desk chairs in their meeting rooms - they feel like sitting on a cloud, and my back doesn't even notice them. But I'm sure they were like $600 a piece or something, lol. That's what inspired me to get a mesh chair next time I buy a chair).

The Large Hadron Collider was mistakenly labeled the world's most powerful atom smasher. It's actually Chuck Norris.

Chuck Norris doesn't coauthor papers. He needs no collaborators.

Chuck Norris' Erdős number is -1.

Chuck Norris really made an impression on the interviewers. His impact factor is ∞.

Chuck Norris never attends meetings. Meetings attend to him.

Chuck Norris has won the award for Best TA for four years running. He can really teach students a lesson.

Chuck Norris got his Ph.D. without defending his thesis. None of the committee members wanted to try him.

I sign my emails with a simple "FirstName LastName", but I've come across some grad students who have signed emails like this:


Joe Bigghead Ph.D. Candidate Department of Departments Big Name University

... And my first impression (having never even met them in person) was always highly negative. I'm not sure what use there is to identifying yourself as part of the second-lowest class on the academic totem pole (it's as if they think that people they'll meet will actually care about some lowly unknown Ph.D. student ). The first and last name should suffice; if not, you're probably doing something wrong.

Putting "Some Organization Fellow" in your signature is going way overboard.

I sign my emails with a simple "FirstName LastName", but I've come across some grad students who have signed emails like this:


Joe Bigghead Ph.D. Candidate Department of Departments Big Name University

... And my first impression (having never even met them in person) was always highly negative. I'm not sure what use there is to identifying yourself as part of the second-lowest class on the academic totem pole (it's as if they think that people they'll meet will actually care about some lowly unknown Ph.D. student ). The first and last name should suffice; if not, you're probably doing something wrong.

Putting "Some Organization Fellow" in your signature is going way overboard.

I've been browsing through the lists of alumni posted by graduate programs and professors at my prospective graduate institutions (you know, those "where are they now?" pages), and I've observed something odd. Seems to me like the alumni of Ph.D. programs at very prestigious private institutions (I'll call them "Ivy" schools--see note below) overwhelmingly end up in one of just a few career tracks soon after graduation: (1) for the lucky/superstar ones, as an Assistant Professor (that is, tenure-track) at an R1 university (those with 'Very High Research Activity' in the current Carnegie classification); (2) as an Assistant Scientist or Assistant Research Professor (non-tenure-track) at an R1 institution; or (3) have fallen off the face of the Earth (more like still slaving away on soft money somewhere after a postdoc or three).

I have only come across just a handful of names of former students who are now employed at a no-name state university or a community college. Assuming that basically all (>90% or so, from what professors tell me) of the students who attend these graduate programs based at Ivies that are highly regarded in academic circles actually wish to stay in academia on the tenure-track after receiving a Ph.D., why aren't there more of them employed at these (less-well-regarded) types of institutions?

Is it

because Nowhere State University (at which a professor's research/teaching ratio is ~40/60 or less) won't hire a Ph.D. from Columbia, or because your average Ph.D. from Columbia wouldn't want to work at Nowhere State University (and would much prefer a >70% research job, even if it means relying on soft money for their entire career as a research scientist, given the competitiveness of the academic job market)? TL;DR: Does a Ph.D. from an "Ivy" restrict your academic job options such that it makes it difficult to obtain a position that is not primarily focused on research?

Thanks!

waddle

P.S. This question is most relevant to the STEM fields, but feel free to chime in even if you're not in the natural sciences/math/whatever. Thanks!

P.P.S. I'm using "Ivy" in a non-strict sense to encompass all very prestigious private institutions with huge research output (think not only Columbia, but also Stanford & co.). Also, yeah, I picked on Columbia today. Sorry Columbia people, if you're out there.

P.P.P.S. Although I posted this in the Jobs forum, this is more relevant for my decision as to which Ph.D. program to attend (i.e. non-"Ivy" but still R1 graduate institution (the alumni of which tend to find jobs at Nowhere State Universities) vs. an "Ivy"), as I intend to stay in academia after my degree, but hopefully in a position in which I can do at least as much teaching as research.

Let's say, the student has some really strong parts, but has taken certain other risks that may have consequences such as 0's in grad school courses at age 18.

I'll be brutally honest here (and I haven't read many of the previous posts so I apologize if I'm being redundant). If I were on an adcom, I wouldn't care whether you took Math 583 when you were 8 or 38. You came through an early entrance program (UW's, if I may ask?). Therefore, you were a college student, and a college-age student, and had all the responsibilities generally assigned to college students (not failing courses, understanding your limits, managing your time, etc.). So I think it's better to take responsibility for having flunked a course rather than trying to explain it away based on an "age" factor. Age really has little to do with intellectual ability, but there is something to be said about maturity (ADD may be a good reason, but it's hard to work into your application without sounding like you're trying to shirk responsibility--maybe get your most trusted recommender to mention it, instead of saying it yourself in your SOP?). If I were reviewing your transcript, I would question (whether justly or unjustly) whether you have since become wiser, and I'd need a good justification from you in your SOP to make sure that the Inquiline who failed MATH 583 at age 18 is not the Inquiline that will be working in my lab. After all, what PI would want to take a chance on a student who may decide on a whim to take 9 courses their first semester and flunk out of grad school? Maybe I'm being unfair, but it's always good to plan for the worst-case interpretation.

Good luck!

waddle

I see that some words are often typed in all caps, even if they're not meant to be an acronym. A common example on these fora is "IVY", which should be properly capitalized as follows: "Ivy (League)". Or school names such as "UWISC"--properly written "U. Wisc." or some variation thereof.

What's the rationale behind this? I certainly don't mean to be a jerk, but it does seem as if the use of all caps for IVY is a bit pretentious, especially if all the other words in the post are properly capitalized. Is it because some people don't realize that "Ivy" isn't an acronym, or what?

I don't see how going through law school would help you get into grad school; in fact, it might hurt your chances--it makes you seem as if you don't have focused interests, or changed your mind halfway through law school (or that you couldn't get a good job after law school), or that you are inclined to be a perpetual student. Not trying to be a jerk here, just judging your case from an outsider's perspective.


Yeah, you'd be ill-advised to go through law school if you just wanted a Ph.D., especially if you'd incur massive debt for law school. You might be better off just applying to funded Ph.D. programs in the upcoming application cycle, and between now and December, you can get some decent research experience under your belt. Since you have three semesters of research already, I don't see what the problem is--that's plenty of research, and if you start doing research again, by the time you apply this December, you'll have more than enough to impress admissions committees (provided you can write about it well in your statement). Good luck!

chaos, it seems like you still don't understand why posts like these often end up getting voted down. I think I speak for most GradCafe forumites in saying this: Posters have the right to provide as much or as little information as they are comfortable with. There is no reason that you should try to force anybody to tell you what programs they applied to--this is a (mostly) anonymous forum, and as such, people need not divulge such information that could potentially be used to identify them. In this case (and in other similar recent threads where your posts were voted down), giving you the program name would not help you answer the original poster's question any better. If you were to assist mickey in making his decision, it would have to be in general terms, anyways, since you are not in his field of study. This is what the other people who have posted in this thread have been doing (I don't see any Phys/Astro people here, other than the OP), and I believe this is what the OP is looking for--i.e., general advice. If the OP were to want advice regarding specific Ph.D. programs, he/she would have stated the names of these programs. TL;DR: if you are unable to respond to a post in a way that is useful to the poster, then it's best to not answer.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, and it's definitely nothing personal (hell, I don't even know you). I'm just trying to help you become a more productive member of these forums. In any case, thanks for hearing me out, and please think about net etiquette before posting.

My fellow grad cafe visitors. We are here today to honor hope. We wait with anxious anticipation for a simple email that could make all the difference. It could mean funded research, acceptance into grad school, or not dropping out of grad school. It could mean simple validation.

We are hopeful because we think we have a chance at receiving a fellowship; if we did not think so, we would not have applied. We are hopeful because we successfully whittled down our past accomplishments and future goals to 4 total pages. We are hopeful for a GRFP because we still can be. We can picture ourselves receiving that email and staring in blissful disbelief. We can hear ourselves calling our parents to tell them with pride and excitement.

Given past notification times and dates, we may receive news in a few hours or a week. I challenge you now not to spend these moments commiserating and kvetching but celebrating. Maybe you have research plans to discover new applications of block copolymers, to combat human trafficking, or to evaluate the feasibility of carbon sequestration. Celebrate your research and its positive societal impacts, and embrace whatever hope you have for the future. Acknowledge that the future holds new challenges, rewards, and disappointments.

No one on this board is going to tell you if you received a fellowship. An email read at 10 am is going to convey the same information that it did at 1 am. Disappointment sucks, but hope.... that rocks. So celebrate.

Hi all,

As you may know, recently there was a nuclear reactor accident in Japan. While being very happy to be admitted to Stanford, I started to have some concerns about California after this event. Do you think this should be taken into account while deciding the graduate school? There are numerous schools in california, would we expect a decrease in the rate students accept offers from these schools?

I have worked in the Charlestown Navy Yard for the past 2 years. It's kind of an out-of-the-way location, yes. However, there are shuttles connecting all the MGH properties, and these are quite reliable and convenient. The Navy Yard - MGH main campus shuttle runs until 1am on weekdays, and business hours on weekends. It stops at North Station (orange/green lines) in both directions, and at Charles/MGH (red line) on the way to main campus only.

(Not sure I'd recommend using the shuttle for a longer haul, though. Between Navy Yard and North Station is pretty clear sailing, but after that, Boston traffic takes over. When I have to go fetch something at Brigham and Women's, for instance, it takes me a solid hour each way.)


There's a bus that goes from Sullivan (orange) to the Navy Yard, but I've never used it; iirc it's not all that frequent, and doesn't run on weekends. But it does exist, and I've seen it going by.

Myself, I live near Central Square. Most of the time, I bike (5.5 miles, 30 min, mostly bike paths). If it's too darn cold, or I'm lazy, there is a bus (EZ Ride Shuttle) that goes through Central - Kendall - Lechmere - North Station, and then I take the MGH shuttle (45 min total).

I know a fair number of grad students who live near the T - either the Allston/Brighton area off the Green, or the northward stretch of the Red, or the Jamaica Plain area off the Orange. These are all fairly young-people-centric places with lots of single rooms for rent. (Parts of Allston are a bit "fratty", but the other places aren't bad.) I can't think of anyone offhand who actually lives in Charlestown, though. There's yuppieville and there's the projects, but not much between - that's the impression I got, from my brief attempt to find something near work. But you might have better luck.

Sorry for the brain-dump; hope some of that was useful information.

i should have figured out a good way to mention that i'm gay to up my chances then

I see that some words are often typed in all caps, even if they're not meant to be an acronym. A common example on these fora is "IVY", which should be properly capitalized as follows: "Ivy (League)". Or school names such as "UWISC"--properly written "U. Wisc." or some variation thereof.

What's the rationale behind this? I certainly don't mean to be a jerk, but it does seem as if the use of all caps for IVY is a bit pretentious, especially if all the other words in the post are properly capitalized. Is it because some people don't realize that "Ivy" isn't an acronym, or what?

Here's my male perspective.
I would personally resent being with a spouse who thinks I am a failure.

What are all 3 of the schools you got into and for what program?

But you also said you got into a Math program. Give me the program that corresponds to what schools you got accepted to. You never even gave the names of the schools you got accepted to.

So I only applied to a few grad programs in my field, Physics and Astronomy, because I made a very late decision to apply to grad school after taking a year off to work in industry. As a result, I wasn't really sure what I wanted to do or where to apply. I only applied to 2 top-10 schools and 4 more in the top-15 range. I didn't get into any of the top-10's but got in to 2 of the 11-15 schools. I also applied to about 8 more math and engineering schools and got into 1 Applied Math program.

Theres a few catches with the schools so thats why I honestly don't really see myself being happy going to any of the schools I got into.


For one of them, its only a few hours away from where I live and did my undergrad studies at. I lived in this same area my whole life and would like to go to a few environment. I didn't even like the school I did my undergrad at, due in part to troubles with adjusting to transferring there, until my last couple semesters. I guess the main reason I applied to this similar school was because its close to my family, which especially matters to me since I recently lost my father so my mother spends alot more time alone now. Also, the school was pretty strong in the research areas I was interested in. But my interests have changed now, and while this school is still fairly strong in my new interest, it only has 1 prof researching in that area, so its sort of risky in terms of whether I can get along with my advisor or not. Based on the visit, he seemed like a nice guy I could get along with. But hes recently been spending alot of time using the campus' supercomputers and not being available with his students


For the 2nd school, I just visited the school and liked the feel of the dept. However, I just recently found out that they're having major funding issues in the research area that is now my main interest. Thus, they can't even guarantee supporting me on a TA if I want to do research in that area.


For the 3rd one, I also haven't visited yet, but the location also seems nice. The program offers a wide range of research areas, which appealed to me, but is weak in my (now) main research interest.

I'm not enthusiastic about any of my options. I would've been happy going to option #2 until I just recently heard about those problems. I'm seriously considering reapplying

If I reapply, I plan to do research in my (now) main research area, and to work maybe 60 hrs/wk in it. I understand theres risks to reapplying. Come to think about
it, I will need to get at least 2 new LORs since one of my previous research advisors told me he won't write me LORs again. My other research advisor didn't even respond to my email when I notified him about where I got accepted to and how I hinted that I may want to reapply next year. So I'm guessing he might not even want to write another LOR if I reapply. I guess thats because I may have annoyed him by applying to over 15 schools total (I appleid to about 8 more math and engineering schools. I got rejected from all of them).

I'm new here so I apologize if any of this has been asked before, but -
I've always been interested in grad school- particularly for Psych/Poli Sci, however I don't feel I have a substantial amount of research experience to qualify me for entrance to a decent PhD program, plus I want some real world experience before I'm trapped in Academia, so I've decided to pursue law school (since luckily for me, admissions are almost entirely Objective). I'll be attending a top 30 program (or Top 14 if I get into one I've been waitlisted at). I'm going to try my hardest to get on some type of Journal so I'll have research experience and the opportunity to write a note (a student written journal publication), and clerk for a Judge after graduation if possible. If I do all of this would I have a decent shot into a top grad program? Particularly if I find a professor whose research interests intersect with law (shouldn't be too hard to find in Psych/Poli Sci).
My main concern is that my Undergrad GPA is 3.5 (3.8 upper level/major), which seems a bit low for PhDs (but from quick glance at this board GPAs dont seem nearly as important for grad school as it is for law school). I do have 3 semesters of experience as a research assistant as well.
Or is this whole path completely retarded and I should just aim for a Masters program to get research experience that could lead to a decent PhD program?

Hey chaospaladin, I hope I don't come off as a jerk, but for these sorts of things I think it's better if you did most of the legwork yourself. Questions like these are the types you could answer just as effectively on your own--Googling the right keywords works wonders. I'm sure if you spend some more time browsing department websites (my guess is that most people who applied to Ph.D. programs looked at the websites of >50 departments and narrowed down the field to 5-15 programs to which they applied), you'll find your answers pretty quickly.

In answer to your question, I found a few chemistry Ph.D. programs that don't appear to have GPA cutoffs: UC Riverside, UT El Paso, UT Dallas. I'm sure there are a lot more; you just have to look for them. I hope this helps.

waddle

I am new to this forum and I need all your advice. My university nominated me this year for NSERC PGS-D 2011-2012. When I applied I was First Year PH.D student. But unfortunately got rejected. I am listing my credentials to you guys to enlighten me why did my application get rejected?

1) I listed 9 Conference Proceedings, 3 Journal papers (mostly all above 1.3 Impact Factor) in Elsevier, 2 Filed Patents (which was previously accepted by MARS INNOVATION, GOVT. OF CANADA with acceptance rate of only 10 %) for industrial commercialization and Patent processing. In total I listed around 15 Publications. When I applied I was First Year PH.D student.

2) I am 2 times OGS recipient, OGS 2009-2010 and OGS 2010-2011. I have in total around 8 awards and scholarships.

3) I have almost 3 yrs of extensive TA experience as Head Teaching Assistant in Undergraduate and Graduate Level.

4) My Journal was listed as " SCIENCE DIRECT TOP 25 HOTTEST ARTICLES" from Microelectronics Reliability, Elsevier Journal in First quarter of 2010.

5) Strong recommendation letters.

6) Masters GPA of 4.07/4.33 and Ph.D GPA of 4.17 / 4.33.

I am very dejected as I dont understand as why my application was not considered. Please let me know. By the way, has anyone also got any letters to apply for NSERC Industrial Postgraduate scholarship along with the rejected letter from NSERC?

I am new to this forum and I need all your advice. My university nominated me this year for NSERC PGS-D 2011-2012. When I applied I was First Year PH.D student. But unfortunately got rejected. I am listing my credentials to you guys to enlighten me why did my application get rejected?

1) I listed 9 Conference Proceedings, 3 Journal papers (mostly all above 1.3 Impact Factor) in Elsevier, 2 Filed Patents (which was previously accepted by MARS INNOVATION, GOVT. OF CANADA with acceptance rate of only 10 %) for industrial commercialization and Patent processing. In total I listed around 15 Publications. When I applied I was First Year PH.D student.

2) I am 2 times OGS recipient, OGS 2009-2010 and OGS 2010-2011. I have in total around 8 awards and scholarships.

3) I have almost 3 yrs of extensive TA experience as Head Teaching Assistant in Undergraduate and Graduate Level.

4) My Journal was listed as " SCIENCE DIRECT TOP 25 HOTTEST ARTICLES" from Microelectronics Reliability, Elsevier Journal in First quarter of 2010.

5) Strong recommendation letters.

6) Masters GPA of 4.07/4.33 and Ph.D GPA of 4.17 / 4.33.

I am very dejected as I dont understand as why my application was not considered. Please let me know. By the way, has anyone also got any letters to apply for NSERC Industrial Postgraduate scholarship along with the rejected letter from NSERC?

I didn't cast self-righteous judgment in that post. Anyone will tell you that $100k in debt for an undergraduate degree is a bad fiscal decision. And for anyone to say that $24k/yr in debt repayment "isn't unbearable" leads me to believe you are fiscally naive. Which is why I took a few minutes to run those numbers for you, just in case you happened to be unaware of them.

Since you asked "what is one supposed to do..." One can do what myself, and many others, have done. Go to a school you can afford, do extremely well there, and then get a fully funded offer to a top 5 PhD program, like me. That would have been the more responsible move. I went to a public university where tuition was $5,000/yr. I didn't have parents to pay for school and I have a wife and two kids to support. So don't act like going to a PRIVATE school and wracking up $100k in loans to play football was your only option. If you had a football scholarship which barred you from working, why would you have needed $100k in loans, in the first place? Maybe you should think twice before being so self-pitying when many others on this public forum don't even have a funded offer and/or are coming from much more difficult circumstances than yourself.