juilletmercredi

Do not commit to working on a program that you are less than interested in. I'm curious about the idea that you would rather attend a program and do a project that you are not excite about/does not align with your interests than not being a PhD program at all. IMO, it should be the opposite - a PhD program is a means to an end, and it's hard enough to study for 6 years if you are studying something about which you are not enthusiastic. If you think you will be bored, please do NOT go. Also, be wary about doing what PIs want you to do because it will suit their needs, but not yours. A PhD program is supposed to be mutually beneficial. The PI gets a research assistant who writes papers with them and does work with them, but YOU need to do research that will help you achieve your goals and get training in what you want to do. If your future research will require technical skills or you want your "brand" to be the technical research, don't join this project. In any case, you shouldn't have to give your PoI a decision this week - if their department is part of the Council of Graduate Schools agreement, they're supposed to give you until April 15 to decide. I would politely contact the PI and tell her that you are happy to hear about this project but that you're still waiting to hear back from other schools and that you'd like/need more time to decide. If they try to pressure you into deciding in just a week where you want to study for the next 6 years, especially without having a full complement of information, I would be wary about attending that department anyway.

Err, this isn't 100% true. It's generally more difficult for people in interdisciplinary programs, especially "studies" programs, to get faculty positions. For example, an anthropology PhD could work in an anthro department, a media studies or communication department, a school of public health...I've even seen an anthropologist working in a school of nursing (and no, she did not have a nursing degree). A media studies PhD, however, generally cannot get hired in an anthro department (at least in the U.S.). They can get hired in a media studies department, maybe in other interdisciplinary departments like public policy or communication or American studies if they do work related to that - but they also have to compete with the disciplinary scholars for that, and disciplinary scholars tend to prefer other disciplinary scholars. It's my experience that most of the professors in interdisciplinary departments are actually PhDs in a discipline who do research in that area (e.g., American studies professors may be American historians or American sociologists or American economists, but less frequently have the PhD in that area). I actually attend an interdisciplinary department and most of our professors are people who got a PhD in a discipline (history, political science, economics, sociology, anthropology, psychology, etc.) rather than people who got a doctoral degree in the actual interdisciplinary field my department is. My personal advice is to consider these separately. 1. I would certainly not pay for a PhD, so I would leave the Sussex program regardless of my decision about the German university. Then reapply to other universities that might fund me. 2. I wouldn't get a PhD in a discipline that I didn't want to study. Yes, to a certain extent you can answer the same research questions from a variety of departments; what will change is the approach. However, if you want to be trained as an anthropologist and teach in an anthro department, you should probably get a PhD in anthropology. 3. Ask your potential PI (or the director of graduate studies) what placement is like at this German university. Where do PhD graduates go after they finish their degrees? Are they teaching? Are they working? If they don't seem to know, that's a red flag.

Of course we're talking about this; there are many threads on this issue, several of them discussions about recently published articles like this one. And this advice is given out constantly in the Decisions, Decisions thread. It's not new. Absolutist language is also not really helpful...I did take out a small amount of debt in my program, mostly to cover relocation costs. The debt is such that even if I dropped out of my PhD program today and got a job with my MA, I would still be able to cover the payments. I also disagree that it's an "extremely bad financial decision". My funding was about $32,000 per year. With my BA in psychology, I probaby could've expected to make about that. During years 4 and 5 of my program, with additional income plus my fellowship I was averaging $45,000. That's a full-time income, and again, I probably would've have made much more with my BA in psychology. I wasn't paying into SS/saving for retirement, but I have a postdoc lined up for next year so I will soon, and assuming I get gainfully employed after that I will continue to. Yes, you start saving a little later, and yes, you may have less money saved for retirement or less money in the bank than if you started saving at 22. But that doesn't mean that it's an "extremely bad financial decision" as long as you are able to live comfortably after you finish. Also, not everyone wants to own a house, or even needs to. But the caveat is that these things are only true if you have full funding that's large enough to cover your living expenses in the program, as well as tuition, fees, and health insurance. Otherwise my advice is always don't go.

^This is also true. I found my graduate classes to be very easy. There weren't a lot of assignments, and many of them were basically discussion hours with a paper at the end. The point is more to feed you the information that you need to do your research. But once my third year hit, ish got really real.

Who are these current students, though? You can't generalize across students or faculty really. I've known faculty to be really supportive of students who leave programs and I've known faculty who have been horrible, and everywhere in-between. Same with students. I have also not seen it implied that students who are thinking of leaving are "lesser" for doing so. In fact, what I've generally seen is that students have been overwhelmingly supportive of students who come here saying that they are thinking about quitting their programs. I also don't see what's so bad about professors expecting you to show up to brown bags, lectures, socializing events, etc. That's standard in every career, not just academia - it's called networking. That's how you form connections and get jobs. Otherwise, I do agree that many graduate students quit graduate school because their departments are toxic snake pits. Academic departmental politics can be more vitriolic than corporate ones, often because academics sometimes think of themselves as "above" silly things like money and free time and view being a professor not as a career but as a vocation, like a call to the ministry. I just have to roll my eyes - I like research and I like teaching, but I do it because I want to feed myself and my family, not because I think the Spirit of Higher Education called me to this. But a lot of the pettiness I've seen in departments happens because some academics have giant egos. But lots of people quit other kinds of jobs because their workplaces are toxic, too. That's not exclusive to academia.

I'm an advanced grad student and I wear UGGs about 30% of the time. They're comfortable and you can dress them up. Don't do UGGs + sweatpants or yoga pants, but some skinny dark jeans tucked into UGGs is okay. I usually wear nice jeans (no holes/rips/distressing, no fading), a nice top (button down, sweater, semi-dressy) and flats, Keds, booties, sandals, or UGGs depending on the time of year. It was 19 degrees today and I live in NYC, so hell yeah I wear UGGs. They're warm and comfy.

I read a lot, I write fiction, I run. I'm trying to get back into cycling but I need a bike first.

I think that my cumulative GPA (3.42) was a bit low for my doctoral program, but I was accepted because I had very high GRE scores, a high major GPA (3.67) and pretty extensive research experience for someone at my stage (plus good LORs and solid SOP). I think it's very common for a person to be a bit lacking in one area of the numbers game - lowish GPA or lowish GRE scores - but still be very successful because of an otherwise outstanding package. I think it's far more difficult to overcome a lack of required undergraduate courses, although it depends on what they are. For example, an applicant to my psychology department would not be admitted if they hadn't taken undergraduate statistics or undergraduate research methods, even if they otherwise had a pretty decent application package. I doubt a social psychologist would be admitted if they had never taken social psychology. But, my other department is a mish-mosh of social sciences in the service of public health. And while they generally advise that you have taken social science courses, the department has admitted (in the master's program) everyone from biology and chemistry majors to English literature majors. The doctoral program does tend to be a little more stringent - almost all of our doctoral students were social science majors in undergrad. But I did have a friend who got a PhD in biostatistics who majored in chemistry in undergrad and got her master's in a social science before getting the PhD in biostats. In sum - I think it depends on the course(s) that you are missing, and the type of program to which you are applying.

Yes, people do transfer doctoral programs. Whether you quit and apply again next cycle, or stay and "transfer", the process will be very similar - so really you should just do what you feel is right now re: quitting or staying. The easiest way to do this is if you have the support of your home department. I know you don't have an adviser yet, but you do have a Director of Graduate Studies. I would talk to this person and voice that you don't feel like the department is a good fit for you anymore. Don't disparage the classes; just state that no one who you wanted to work with is taking students this year, and that means that the program won't give you the research training you wish to have. Hopefully the DGS will be sympathetic to that. He or she may have some suggestions to fix the problem - but if your heart is set on transferring, just let him/her know that. The next step is for you to start contacting PIs at programs that you'd be interested in "transferring" to. I put "transferring" in quotation marks because it's not really like transferring in undergrad. Many programs won't accept any of your course credits from your current doctoral program. Some may accept a few. Moreover, a much more direct connection is need - there needs to be someone willing to take you at your new program, and they need an assurance that you're leaving the old program because of fit/research issues and not any performance issues. This is where the support of your department comes in - at least one of your recommendation letters needs to come from a professor at your current department (normally it would be your adviser, but you don't have one yet). Anyway, these programs can be ones you were accepted to last cycle (easiest way to go, as they already have your credentials on file and you know that you are admissible) or they can be new ones. Contact the PI that you wanted to work with and explain the situation neutrally - you came here, you're doing well, but the PI you thought you would be able to work with turned out to not be taking students and thus you are left with a less-than-ideal research fit. (Don't disparage the program or discuss your dissatisfaction with the courses; that's irrelevant, and you don't want to seem like the kind of person who bashes your program.) You may have to apply just like any other new student would have to, or you may have a more streamlined process - it just depends. By the way, you will need to do this even if you decide to drop out and try again next season. You can't just apply as if you never went to a doctoral program, because if you are found out you'll come off as dishonest (and it is VERY easy to find these things out). Also, last thing: It's pretty common for doctoral programs to not give you a whole lot of freedom with free electives. It is, after all, a doctoral program: they have a specific set of skills they want you to learn.

Well, what do you want to do? Your graduate studies should be motivated by your career goals. Do you want to do research in social work, potentially teaching at a school of social work, perhaps pairing that with some social work practice? Then you should get a PhD in social work. Do you want to do public policy work, perhaps working for nonprofits or government or NGOs, or administer a public or private social work organization? Then an MPP or an MPA would be better. The MPA is more if you want to go on to do administrative and management work in the public sector, whereas the MPP is if you want to do policy analysis and creation (also likely in the public sector but possibly for a private firm).

I totally disagree that the first year is the worst. For me, the first year was one of the BEST. Everything was new and shiny and I was still pretty excited. Here are some thoughts: While my first two years of grad school were okay, towards the end of my second year I started to feel "done" and burned out, and I had a miserable third year and a pretty bad fourth year. I still loved my field and wanted to do research, but I realized that I probably could've done most of what I wanted with a master's in my field or a related one. I was tired of being on a grad student stipend, tired of a lot of politics of academia. I contemplated dropping out. Ultimately I decided to stay for a variety of reasons. When I was seriously thinking about dropping out, I learned a few things: -Everyone feels shame upon leaving academia, whether it's done leaving after the first year of grad school or leaving after having achieved tenure. The academic system brainwashes you into thinking it's a vocation, a calling, a higher state of being that defines your identity and establishes the base of your worth as a person. IT'S NOT. It's just a field, just like any other - it's not really that different, inherently, from business administration or nursing or accounting or nonprofit work. People move in and out of it all the time, much more than senior professors make it out to be. The primary goal for anyone who has sincerely decided that they want to leave is to overcome that feeling of shame. -So here's the tip to it: For me, there were three primary sources of shame: --The internal. Deal with this first. There's the idea that you "worked so hard" and that if you just spend a little more time, you'll get the PhD. F THAT. Life is too short to be miserable and the time you've already spent is a sunk cost. Regardless of whether you finish or not, you're never going to get it back. So if you feel like you will be miserable, don't extend the misery for 4-5+ more years just because you've already spent a few months there. --Perceived shame from friends and family. I found that this was largely nonexistent. My family of non-academics didn't really care what I chose to do to make money, and didn't value academia the same way I did. They were nothing but supportive no matter WHAT I wanted to do, and were very sympathetic to not wanting to be a student anymore. Same with friends. I had friends who listened to my rants, volunteered job search help and offered to make connections. Your real friends and family just want you to be happy; most of them do not have the hang-ups academics do about the line between a PhD and an MA or BA. Venture out - talk to someone you feel really close to about your feelings, just one person. You'll probably be surprised by what you find. --Perceived shame from the department. There are two ways this can go. There are some departments that genuinely won't care - and I mean that in a good way. They want all of their doctoral students to be happy, and they are made up of sane people who realize that academia is not for everyone and that it is completely healthy and normal for some students to choose to leave. Although they won't be happy to see you leave, they will support you and be understanding. Bless these departments. Then there are the ones filled with egos who believe the party line about academia being a measure of self-worth, people who don't finish as being "lesser" beings who just "couldn't cut it," and will try to shame or guilt you into staying. F THEM. Seriously. Forget what they think - you won't need them. Just be polite and keep pushing. Who cares what a bunch of old senior professors think of you when you're off having a fabulous career doing something else? In 3 years you won't care. -I also suggest seeing a psychologist. For me, the psychologist helped me in two ways. One, she helped me realize that there was no reason for me to feel ashamed or put so much pressure on myself for not liking academia the same way my colleagues and cohort mates did. Two, she made me realize that I wasn't "trapped" in academia, and honestly that made ALL the difference. Once I started looking for jobs and realizing that there were PLENTY of things I could do without a PhD, ironically, I felt happier. No more was I a doctoral student simply because I couldn't do anything else; instead, I was making an active choice to be here, and I could leave whenever I wanted to. You have no idea how much that improved my self-esteem and happiness. I started treating graduate school as a regular job/career choice rather than the hallowed realm of austere scholars, and to be perfectly frank it is not my first priority in my life. I am now, as is my husband and my friends and personal and mental health. Strikingly, this has made me MORE productive rather than less. I look forward to working on my dissertation (sometimes) because I give myself permission to NOT do it sometimes. I like discussing the finer points of theory in my field and am passionate about my work because I give myself permission to not think about it when I don't feel like it. Once I did that, I realized how often it comes to mind unbidden, and realized that I do have a true passion - I just needed to put it in the right perspective. Also, realize that identity confusion is really common in the mid-20s. It's not just because you're in grad school; the mid-20s are a prime identity establishing time in the work world these days. I have lots of friends in that age range and most of us are going through it or have went through it. I only have one friend who knew exactly what she wanted to do from college through grad school and into her career, and even she had a tough time in grad school. The point from that is - I'm not saying that you should quit, and I'm not staying that you should stay. That's a highly personal decision and there's no right or wrong answer. What I'm saying is that you can probably be happy either way. You're not trapped; you can figure out what to do if you're not in grad school, as you are a smart and talented individual. Don't worry about that just yet. Worry about figuring out whether staying where you are, or doing something else, is the best fit for your personal needs and goals. Some people choose to go the lower-risk route of taking a leave of absence and getting a job doing something else for a year, just to test the waters. For some, the break recharges them and they return refreshed and finish up. I suspect most, however, wanted to leave all along and the full-time job helped them ease out and realize that yes, there really is a world out there besides academia. [i want to write a book about getting through graduate school, and your post amongst others has inspired me to write a chapter on deciding whether to leave in the book. So many students ask the question, many more probably wonder without outright asking, and I've found that most books about getting through grad school don't address it. It gives the illusion that everyone slides through easily. Ha!)

I agree with a good deal of the advice that you've been given in this thread, but I want to add one thing. People have encouraged getting away from your location more often, and I agree - you need to go see your friends and family to stay sane, and if you have people who are willing to let you sleep on their couch you have only the cost of a plane ticket to contend with. I have hosted friends from all over the country in my apartment before I moved to one too small to do so. BUT I also wanted to add - learn to love, or at least make your peace with, the place you live. Even if you were able as a grad student to flit off to an exotic locale every weekend, you STILL have to be around M-F to do your work. But I'm guessing that in reality the most you'll be able to get out will be once every month or so, so you're still going to be spending the majority of the next 3 years of your life in Small Southern Town. You've got to make your peace with where you live, otherwise you will be miserable and counting the days until you move somewhere else. And trust me, this is not productive for work - I remember in the middle years of my program, I started to hate the place that I lived and everything about it and I desperately wanted to move somewhere else. My program is in New York City. I had dreamed about coming to live here. Most happiness research shows that people tend to grow where they're planted, and the majority of people can be at least content in most places. That's not saying that location is not important. Indeed, I am one of those who would rather give up academia than live somewhere I don't want to live. What I'm saying is that I think that a lot of us need to change our ideas of what's "undesirable" and open ourselves to embracing a culture that may be slightly different than we envisioned; conversely, we may be a bit wrong about what we think we really want. I thought I was a big city girl who would thrive in the vertical concrete jungle that is NYC, but I miss trees and cars and horrible shopping malls more than I ever thought I would. My point is - perhaps your feelings about your small Southern town are unconsciously biasing you towards being unhappy there? (In my middle years of the program, my general unhappiness in my program was definitely directed into anger at NYC.) There may not be anyone who shares your intellectual interests, but in my experience people are more alike than they are dissimilar, so maybe there are some other hobbies or things you enjoy that you can find friends through. Or perhaps you discover a new hobby or interest - I joined a social sports league to meet friends in NYC, and I recently started running and there are running clubs EVERYWHERE. Many of my current friends are employees of the university, actually; many entry-level employees at the university are in their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s. I met them through working at the school, but if you go to some of the school's sponsored social events you might meet people at all levels. In fact, at this point in my life I think I am the only one in my close friend group who's still in graduate school. Perhaps get involved at the university level - run for grad student senator (nobody ever wants to do this!), work in residential life (where I met most of my current close friends), join some other grad student group around. So while I agree with getting away every now and then, you also need to make sure that you are at least content on the days that you're in town.

UGGGH I was supposed to give a job talk for my postdoc on Thursday at a university 5 hours away by bus, but there's a snowstorm that's going to hit tomorrow (f*cking snow) when I was supposed to leave. So we rescheduled for three weeks from now. Except I forgot to reschedule my bus today and you have to do it 24 hours before the bus leaves. F*cking Megabus! They cancelled all of the routes AROUND the one I booked, but not my actual route. I called at 7 pm (my bus was to leave at 4) to see if they would help me out but apparently there is NO slack for the 3 hours I was behind. The guy on the phone was kind of rude, too; he was like "You agreed to all of this when you bought the tickets" in this like scolding voice. F U dude! So I'm out $26 - not a lot of money, but still! Also I hate my literature review of my dissertation. Haaaaate it. Can't wait to be done. My department is going through some chaaaaanges and it's a bit overwhelming and I just want it to stop. Biggest complaint: I got surgery on Jan 16 to get a cyst removed from over my tailbone. The doctor left the wound open to heal from the bottom up, but that means that I have to pack the wound with gauze every day. I can't see the wound myself, so my hubby's been helping me, but I am SO freaking tired of changing this gauze and I just want it to heal already. I was a tiny bit irritated because I told my husband that I wanted to get the wound changed before he left to go meet with his group for a project; I tried to rush in and out of the bath tub to get the old gauze out but when I came out he wouldn't take the 10 extra minutes to stay behind and pack it before he left. This is important because I have to take painkillers before I unpack the old gauze and he packs it because it hurts and I'm afraid the painkillers will wear off by the time he comes back.

^Well, figuring out how to formulate the body paragraphs is kind of the point of the process of writing the thesis, especially in the humanities. As your ideas and arguments develop, your body will develop along with them. For some guidance - most universities have a small library of previously written student theses. Your adviser may have copies of her past students' theses in her office, or there may be a section in the library that has them, or you may be able to find them online. If you flip through a few of those, you may be able to get some ideas about how a graduate thesis is structured.

This story does not add up/does not make any sense. It simply doesn't make any sense that an adviser would agree to advise you, get you halfway through the thesis, praise you for the quality of the thesis and then pull out claiming prior commitments. I'm not saying that it didn't happen, I just find it very hard to believe. Why didn't you answer any of fuzzy's questions? I am very curious. Also, how can your thesis be halfway done if less than a week ago you were shopping two separate thesis topics? Just two days ago you asked how to formulate body paragraphs. In any case, most campuses having a writing center that you can go to if you need writing help. But if you need line by line editing you usually have to pay for that - look for flyers on campus or check on Craigslist. Often there are English PhD students who do this for a little extra cash on the side.

While it's a red flag not to have a reference from your advisor, a lukewarm reference from your research advisor is worse than a glowing reference from another professor. And some people are unable to say "I won't give you a good reference," so "My reference won't be a great one" sounds like a euphemism for a lukewarm to negative reference. So were I you, OP, I'd seek a reference elsewhere.

If you keep getting the same computer-based questions from students, I would suggest that they go to campus IT for a computer course or basic help session - most university IT departments do that. But "what should I Google?" That's just the epitome of laziness. I don't think you'll hurt their feelings too bad by telling them to figure out that part by themselves. And if you do, their feelings are too delicate anyway.

It's only $195 for graduate programs, not for students. It's free for students. But I agree it doesn't seem very useful; if departments have to pay $200 to sign up and be on the site most won't, and you'll only be able to connect with the programs who have already signed up for the money.

I totally agree that you don't have to live on ramen and Hamburger Helper as a grad student...ugh. I do eat ramen but only occasionally. You can get inexpensive food options and cook them. One of the things I decided as a grad student was that the stipend they paid me was not enough to live the way I wanted, so I got an addition part-time job. I've been doing something on top of grad school since my third year when I finished coursework and had the time. This has the added benefit of giving me non-academic skills to take into the non-academic workplace should I choose to go that route. I've TA'ed courses for more money, worked an as intern for a market-research firm, worked as a hall director in the office of residential life, worked as a statistical consultant, and worked as a student tutoring assistant in the library. If you live in or near a big city, there may be lots of part-time jobs that you can do for 10-15 hours a week to make a little extra cash on the side. Some of them may be office work that will give you useful skills and experience to talk about should you choose to seach for a non-academic job. The other half of this is to be frugal. -Some people budget every dollar that leave the wallet. I neither have time nor interest in doing this. What I do is budget for essentials. $X for rent, $X for utilities and phone, $X for food and $X for other essential bills that have to get paid every month. I set those aside in a separate account. The rest is mine to spend however I want. So some months I may decide to spend, I don't know, $100 on coffee and $0 on movies, whereas other months I spend $150 on clothes and $30 on coffee. But be cognizant of what you are spending and know where you need to cut back. -Do free and cheap things. I live in NYC. I have yet to see a Broadway play, the NYC Ballet, the opera, etc. because they all cost lots of money. I would like to do those things, but I'd rather eat good food. So I choose to do things like go to the museums (all cheap or free with my university ID), go to the park, walk around, etc. My city has free concerts all the time for no reason at all, lol, and sometimes the university has free or cheap events. Search out student discounts. And I'm friends with students and friends at a similar life stage, so I just remind them whatever we do needs to be cheap. -Shop for clothes on sale and stop buying clothes when you don't need anymore. Only buy more when you need to replace something. Do invest in some quality, though - there's a balance between quality and price. -Cook most nights. Seriously, I have started saving so much money by cooking rather than eating out. Learn to make meals that use a lot of the same ingredients. When I lived alone, dinner Tuesday would become lunch Wednesday and sometimes also dinner Wednesday depending on how much came in the package. I'm married now so we usually eat it all but it's still cheaper than eating out - and healthier and tastier, too. -Housing. I have met so many grad students who make a face at living with roommates, even one. They claim that they are completely unable to live with other people, and they would rather pay $$$$ to live alone than $$ to live with a roommate. I am not one of those. I love people, and I don't mind sharing my living space - I actually prefer it. And generally speaking, the cheapest way to satisfy housing needs is to acquire some roommate(s). You can find respectable, quiet, private, sane people out there to live with - I've lived with several of them. Other grad students need housing, too. I once had a roommate who I saw for maybe like 15 minutes the entire week - she was always gone. I've had other roommates who I'm still friends with to this day. It can be really pleasant, I promise. -Related to the above...I would personally investigate any neighborhoods. People have different definitions of "dangerous" or "run down." I lived in a very nice neighborhood in upper Manhattan that a lot of other students didn't want to live in because it wasn't trendy or filled with nice restaurants and shopping. The trade off was that I got a relatively large apartment that I only had to share with one other person for a pretty low price. Whether renting on the market is cheaper than living on campus really depends on the city and the university. My university has two campuses. The main campus is in a very trendy/expensive area, and renting through the university is cheaper than renting an apartment of comparable size and quality in the same neighborhood. But if you are willing to commute just a little bit further (and I'm talking 30 minutes or less on the subway) you can pay a lot less, or get more for the same money. The medical center campus is in a more residential/less expensive neighborhood. I would say that the on-campus housing there is either the same price or actually more expensive than the other housing available in the area; not only that, but the market rental units were generally nicer and better maintained than the campus housing, with better amenities and probably more space.

Hi OP. Sorry that this is happening to you! However, I honestly don't think that legal means are going to be a viable option for you. Sure, you have tenants' rights, but you don't have the right to not be annoyed in your own apartment. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anything she's doing is rising to the level of anything that violates your rights. Given that you are both equal lessees on the lease, your landlord is under no obligation to force your roommate to housetrain her dog, force her to stop using your things, force her to stop throwing out your food...etc. These all fall under "supremely annoying roommate habits" and not things that you could threaten your landlord with. The only thing I could see being something that could potentially rise to the legal factor is if your roommate actually threatened you bodily or you feel unsafe living with her, or if she actually did physical damage to your property. But it doesn't seem like that's the case - she just used your stuff - and so...no. Moreover, a good relationship with your landlord is really important. I'm not saying that you don't want to use a little strength in your argument if they really are wronging you, but it sounds like they are trying to work with you the absolute best they can. Don't ruin your relationship with them by threatening them with legal action. Number one, because you don't really have a leg to stand on in their department - even in NYC, where tenants' rights are pretty strong, there's no kind of legal action you could take in this situation. And number two, because that's the quickest way to sour a relationship with a landlord. You want a super that will come when you call and a landlord who may waive a one-time late payment if it comes to that, not a landlord who is looking for reasons to move you out. If you go to the landlord and threaten to sue them because your roommate is annoying you (and I'm not trying to trivialize it, but this is the way they're going to see it) they're going to look at you like you're crazy. No, the complex is not in charge of keeping their tenants in order or solving roommate conflicts, unfortunately. They're responsible for the physical condition of the buildings, nothing more. Honestly even if your roommate steals or damages your stuff you'll get nothing but legal fees if you sue the landlord. That's a person-to-person civil dispute; it has *nothing* to do with the apartment complex. #8 on that list refers to the physical conditions of the apartment - or, perhaps, physical threat from the roommate - but not this. The right to privacy refers to the right to privacy from building employees, not from your roommate. Even if you did have any rights that were being violated in this case (which you really don't from what you've said), the cost of taking your landlord to court over it will likely be FAR more than the cost of simply breaking the lease and moving out. So it's not worth it at all. What I DO suggest is talking to your landlord about options to move within their owned buildings before June 1. It seems like you intend to move into another apartment they own. Sometimes (often) landlords can transfer a security deposit from one of their units to another without it counting as you breaking a lease, because they are still getting the same amount of money from you. Or see if they will negotiate with you - perhaps you lose your $750 deposit but they waive the lease-breaking fee, or perhaps they will do the opposite - still charge you the fee but return your security deposit. Another option is to see if someone is willing to take over the rest of the lease from you from now until June 1. My roommate did this - she wanted to move out 3 months before the lease was up (not because of me) on September 1, so she found someone who took the lease over in July and that person just resigned with me in September. So find someone who is willing to move in now as opposed to June. They sign a sublease with you until June 1, and then they will sign the actual lease with your roommate. Your landlord sounds like they are willing to work with you, so if you are able to find someone they may even release you from the lease for free and allow that person to sign a new lease with the roommate beginning March 1 (or whenever you find her) if they put down the security deposit and rent on time. Glad you got a lock; I was going to give the same advice, and also the thing about the mini-fridge and the come-to-Jesus talk with the roommate. You may also want to date the food you put in the main fridge so she can't claim it has been in there for two long. And this may seem odd, but could you housetrain her dog? I know that takes some work and she may not be willing to let you do it, but if you didn't mind it could make things more comfortable for all of you.

Part-time is usually not an option for a doctoral degree, btw.

OP: Of course you are entitled to feel however you want to feel. However, certain feelings are crappier and less useful than others, and so perhaps you should consider that as well. Just from a first read-through of your post and some of your responses, I have to say that I do get the sense that you have something of a persecution complex - it seems as though there is always someone else to blame for your personal feelings of negativity or problems. TWO professors are out to get you and are generally unfair; one of your cohort members seems to have some inexplicable and nonsensical vendetta against you; even your psychoanalyst is responsible for your feelings of worthlessness. I'm not saying this to be a meanie; I'm saying it to point it out. YES, you ARE largely in control of how you feel, and YES, you can change your own cycle of negative feelings. You may need help to do so (by seeing a therapist) but you can do it. You may be suffering from clinical depression or another issue that makes it more difficult to do so, but it's not impossible. In general, graduate school requires a thick skin and an ability to see the silver linings and take advantage of your strengths. In that sense, you do, indeed, need to 'get over it.' And I'm not saying this in the callous sense that you need to forget the past and act like nothing happened - but rather in the real-life sense that you need to harness the resources available to you to marshal your strength and march through difficulties. That is really the only way that you'll succeed. If you have an unfair professor or a cohort mate who dislikes you, there is literally nothing you can do about those things. But what you CAN control is your reaction to them. If your professors are sexist, the only thing you can do is turn out your best work and hope for the best (unless you think it's impacting your grades in a demonstrable way, in which case you can talk to your DGS or an ombudsperson). If one of your cohort mates annoys you or is mean to you...stay away from her. Refuse to engage, or just smile and nod and walk away. The financial and academic issues are larger ones. You will need to decide whether it is personally and professionally worth it for you to stay. It seems like you may be having trouble affording the program, a program that does not have any classes you want. If you don't maintain full time, year-long registration status, there are pretty serious tax implications, as you aren't considered a full time student. Most schools also require a full time enrollment for you to be considered a student and progress- registering in the summer when you aren't taking "classes" is pretty typical- I don't know any school that doesn't require it. My school doesn't. I've actually never been to a school that required registration during the summer for you to be considered a full-time student. Even when we're writing a dissertation here, we don't have to register for the summer unless we are planning to defend in that period of time. I personally think it's weird for a student to have to register and pay over the summer if they aren't completing degree requirements, even if it's just a thesis or practicum or internship. (I think the rules are a bit different at my uni if you are on a uni-funded fellowship; those students may actually have to register for some kind of research credit over the summer, but in those cases they are getting paid AND the university is paying for the credits.) I was afraid of that. I have 16 months left of my GI Bill. I figured that should be enough for a 2-year masters program since Fall + Spring + Fall + Spring = 16 months. But I'll most likely have to use it for that first summer as well, so I'll be one semester short. That's even more reason why I'm hoping to get into my top choice (only 1-year) as if there weren't already enough reasons. You shouldn't if your program has no summer classes. My husband is on the GI bill right now. He does not register over the summer, and thus his summers are not counted against his GI Bill months. He's still considered a full-time student. He just doesn't get the MHA over the summer, which means he needs to get an internship or job over the summer. The housing allowace in NYC has gone up, btw - it's a bit over $3200 now. Sweet deal. The tax implications are if you're being paid a summer stipend but are not enrolled as a student. I gathered from the OP that her stipend continues for the summer. IF she's not enrolled as a student, her employment status would change from a student employee (no tax deductions for SS & medicare) to a regular employee, with a corresponding change in taxes. This is true, actually, but there's not much that you can do about it if your school doesn't offer any summer enrollment options. Also, I'm willing to bet that in 99% of cases the cost of maintaining a summer registration is more than the extra income taxes that you have to pay because you're a regular employee rather than a student employee.

Clinical psychology is very competitive - by some accounts, just as or more competitive than medical school. A program may get 100-200 applications for 5-10 slots. It's not uncommon for even great applicants to have to do two or even three rounds when it comes to clinical psychology. Your GPA is fine; your GRE scores are also fine. My top psychology program (not clinical, but the score requirements are similar) recommends a combined GRE score of around a 310, so you're not too far below that. But I've noticed that you didn't mention anything about research or clinical experience. Do you have either? Most successful clinical psychology applicants have 2-3 years of experience as a research assistant in a professor's lab and some volunteering experience in a clinical setting, like a psych clinic or hospital.

Thanks for this post, rising_star! A lot of very helpful information to think about

^But some of the best decisions I've made have also come from being given a chance, accepted somewhere, and taking that offer. I actually kind of hate all of the sensationalism about the "entitlement" of the Millennial generation and how they expect everything to be handed to them. The University of Virginia is a public university; it's designed to serve the needs of the residents of Virginia. The average SAT math + reading is like a 1260-1460. So when a kid has a 1360 on the SAT, a near-perfect GPA and great activities...YES, you DO expect for her to get admitted to a college where she fits the mold of the average student, especially if she's a VA resident. Same with the National Merit Semifinalist with a 4.3 and a 34 ACT. UVa is not one of those hyper-competitive places like Harvard or Yale - they admit 30% of their applicants! Things are different if either of those high schoolers are not from Virginia, but I think a talented, high-achieving Virginian should be expected to be accepted to her state's flagship university, where her parents pay taxes. But the changing nature of higher education is what's changing the playing field for these students. There are some high-profile public universities that have turned to recruiting out of state students because those students will pay out-of-state tuition and aren't eligible for state sources of financial aid. At places like UVa, Michigan, Alabama, and Wisconsin-Madison, Penn State, and Oregon, 30-40% of the student body are from out of state. (Compare to Washington, UCLA, Berkeley, and UGA, where less than 15% of the students were from OOS). As a matter of fact, if you look at a lot of the state flagships these days they have MUCH higher numbers of OOS students than they did 15 or even just 10 years ago. It's not because those schools changed substantially in the last few years; as states decrease funding for their flagship universities, universities feel compelled to look elsewhere for money, and one of the places they find it is in wealthy OOS students who are willing to pay full price. But that drives up the selectivity/drives down the acceptance rate for in-state students. And then for the selective privates...some of them are deliberately driving down their acceptance rates by doing recruitment. They will go visit the schools where they routinely accept students from, but they'll also flood the mailboxes of students who have little hope of getting admitted to their schools. I was visiting the page of Northwestern the other day; the front page of their site boasts that they received a record number of applications this year. Their acceptance rate is already 18%; they have more than 5 applicants for every 1 slot they have in their freshman class. Why are they trying to attract MORE applicants (aside from trying to increase the diversity of their class)? My hypothesis is that it's all about those stupid U.S. News rankings. Wealthy and upper-middle-class families decide where to send their children partially based on rankings, and most rankings (most prominently USN) use selectivity as a factor in the rankings. The other factors (faculty resources, alumni giving, graduation rates) are much harder and more expensive to change quickly, but acceptance rate is something that's easy to drive down relatively quickly. That's my theory, at least. Anyway, my point is that I don't think it's a "sense of entitlement" that high schoolers who bust their ass all through high school expect to get accepted to a good college. That's supposed to be the deal, right? - you work hard and you get rewarded for that hard work. Yes, they are competing nationally, but how many students are there nationally with a 4.8, a 2180, straight As and a full extracurricular schedule? Actually, not that many. Perhaps enough to fill the classes at all the Ivies, but there are still at least 200-300 other great selective colleges where I think a student can expect to go.