juilletmercredi

In my field a single professor usually doesn't have all that power...they can advocate for a person and push that person through, but the applicant also has to be a good applicant in the first place and appealing to the department. However, if it's a good application and the professor really wants the applicant, the rest of the department will usually let them through. There's no reason not to. But if this is a form letter invitation and fee waiver on the basis of GRE scores - no, not necessarily. It's a recruiting tool. Maybe Brandeis wants to increase the quality of its doctoral program by increasing the competitiveness of the students, or maybe they want to increase diversity. Even if it's a big(ish) program - let's say they take in 12 students per year - three people just in this one thread got the invitation, so I would be willing to bet that more than 12 students got one.

You were a double-major. You don't have to explain anything. One of your majors was in the field that you intend to study. If it is actually related to what you want to study - like if you want to study economics in Japan or developed countries or whatever - then talk about it. If it is not related at all (which I suspect it is not since development economics usually has to do with Global South countries) then just don't discuss it, and focus on the things you've done that make you really competitive for grad school. It's not a big deal, especially if you are several years out of undergrad.

Do you think a student applying for a Ph.D (in my case BME) with an M.S. from an average graduate school (ranked somewhere in the top 50) with average M.S. grades (GPA: 3.5) to a top tier program (for example Columbia ranked #20) with research experience and publications would be competitive? Yes, depending on what that research experience and those publications were. If they are comparable with other applicants', yes. Also do you think an average MS student applying to a Ph.D program would be competitive versus a student applying with B.S. with higher grades but less research experience? Impossible to determine in generalities. It depends on the students and their individual accomplishments. A BS graduate from the #1 department in the field with 2 years of quality research with a bigwig could be more competitive than an MS student from an average program with 3 years of ok but not outstanding research with a lesser-known researcher. It also depends on the fit - a student with less research but superb fit could get admitted over a student with more experience but less fit. Remember that research experience past a certain point (around 1.5-2 years, I would say) isn't really about absolute numbers but more about quality, about demonstrating that you are capable of doing what you will be expected to do in graduate school. I agree with the above assessment, though - don't worry about your chances so much, and aim high for the programs in which your research fits neatly.

I do not recommend saying yes and changing your mind later, as you can burn bridges this way. Field can be small. Of course you need to look out for yourself first, but you want to do this in a way that minimizes harm to everyone else. A program calling you in June to accept you is far different from an applicant accepting an offer on November 15 and then turning around on January 10 and changing their mind. The spring semester will begin in just a few weeks and now that department is robbed of the opportunity to find someone to take your place, which may impact their teaching schedule, funding lines, etc. If you HAVE to do it, that's one thing, but it shouldn't be a primary strategy and should definitely not be done with a flippant attitude. Since it's past the decision deadline for the first school, OP, I'd like to hear what happened if you're still around.

I've been in both Union Square Park and Washington Square Park at night, and I am a woman. While I wouldn't make a habit of it or go down there with the intention of being outside, the lighting and atmosphere in those parks is very different from, say, Central Park or Morningside Park. I don't even like going in Morningside Park during the day. As for broker's fees, they are usually around 12% of the yearly rent. Some brokers charge more but that's mostly in the high-end apartment buildings. I would say that most landlords are going to want a guarantor if you make below a certain amount, which students are likely to do. Yes, there are some landlords who will be willing to waive the guarantor requirement if you pay a larger security deposit or a larger amount of months in advance. Others will still want the guarantor. It just really depends on the landlord and how desperate they are to get people in their apartments, especially given the neighborhood. The lower-income neighborhoods' landlords tend to have more students and in my experience tend to be a little more flexible. It feels complicated, but you have to break it down in little steps and relax about it. Most universities have an off-campus housing office that can offer some listings or assistance finding an apartment - that's how we found our first one, and the landlord was used to working with students, so my offer letter sufficed as proof of future income. Some of the ones nearby the universities also accept financial aid award letters. Really, it's so much easier when you are on the ground in the city - you really have to see the places because New York landlords use exaggerated and borderline dishonest language to advertise some of their places. That's why I started recommending to students (especially those who will be here long-term) to see if they can find a short-term sublet for several weeks or even months before looking to find a longer-term place to stay and sign a lease.

In undergrad, I called my professors by their first name. In both of my current departments all of the doctoral students call all of the professors by their first names, and vice versa. It operates on that logic - the professors consider us to be junior colleagues, and they call each other by their first names, so why not us? The undergrads all call them Professor ____, which leads to some interesting situations over email and in personal communications with undergrads (at this point, I always forget to call people by their last name, and I sometimes even blank on what their last names are). The master's students vary, depending on whether they work as RAs or just take classes.

It wasn't just that one bad exam. If you have a 2.99 GPA in a doctoral program, that means you were consistently not doing well, since a B grade in a doctoral program is like a "needs improvement" note. If the MS involves you taking more classes to try to finish your degree program, I can understand why they don't want you to stay and finish - you're not doing well in the classes to begin with. And the handbook may not have a GPA requirement, but I'm assuming they would only want to place students there who are doing well but not well enough for the PhD program - decent but mediocre grades or perhaps have discovered a burning distaste for research. But I agree with the above - the best way to convince them is to convince them that your performance for the last two semesters is due to some acute reason that is currently over and that you are now prepared to get better grades and face challenges better. It will be difficult to do this - one semester is easy enough to explain, but two? Having a clear plan about how to finish (including any remaining credits plus assignments, a thesis, etc.) is going to be key here as well. Also, I guess examine whether or not you actually want to pay out of pocket for the rest of this MS. What is it in, and is it likely to help you in your career?

If they are seriously asking this question they are basically begging for people to play with the truth a little bit. So if they have the audacity to ask (which IMO shouldn't have any bearing on whether or not they decide to admit you), then yes, rank them 1 or 2.

If you want to do infection control in underserved communities, the PhD in epidemiology would probably be better. I've looked at some of those jobs (my research is in HIV prevention) and most of them ask for or prefer people with a degree in epidemiology. Epidemiology is much more natural science- and math-based. Currently, the skills of epidemiologists are also in higher demand, although that may change in coming years. Honestly, what changes the most is the approach. You can do health services research as an epidemiologist - you can take classes in the department, work with their professors, and do a postdoc in health services research (there are dozens of them; I looked them up). Some of those postdocs allow you to get a master's in health services research. Social epidemiologists work on the social and economic (and often political by extension) influences on infectious disease transmission. I suppose it would entirely depend on the department, too. Some SPHs have strengths in social epidemiology, and so an epidemiologist like you would not be at all unusual and very welcome. Other universities have a much more basic science/mathematical modeling focus to their epi programs and thus wouldn't be expecting you, and you might be the only one doing what you do.

1) It is a helping profession, and helping professions that aren't high-pay or high-prestige (like medicine) tend to be female-dominated. 2) It is low-paying, or at least relative to other professions. Some may argue that it's low-paying because it's female-dominated, but it may also be female-dominated because it's low-paying; men sometimes tend to gravitate towards higher-paying fields for a variety of reasons.

I know you said you don't like Macs - but I'm in public health and I run several stats-heavy programs and I have a MacBook Pro. It can't run SAS though, so if you want to run SAS I suggest a PC (and I know people always say that you can use Parallels, but to be really honest running a virtual machine takes up so much RAM and it is super slow, especially with stats programs. It's not as convenient as people think). I agree with the Lenovo and Asus suggestions and I also suggest Toshiba. I would stay away from Sony. Mixed feelings on Dell, but I would lean towards no on that.

Yes, you should wait. But you don't need to work on your network (at least, that's not the only thing you need); you need to retake the GRE and get some research experience.

Wow, wildviolet, your dynamic with your friend/colleague sounds a lot like the dynamic I have with a friend/colleague of mine. We entered my program the same year; we were in the same lab with the same advisor and she just defended whereas I have one more year. Initially I struggled like you did, because I realized that despite our friendship we were essentially competing with each other, and she's more like your friend - competitive, never afraid to ask questions, acts differently when academic crushes come around, makes comparisons between the two of us that makes me uncomfortable, etc. Over time I just got over it and we've become close friends. All of my friends have habits that annoy me to a certain degree, because nobody's perfect; but for us, our friendship and the benefits thereof outweigh the annoyances. Plus she knows everything and she's a great person to go to for feedback and information about academia, the job market, etc. In turn, I've proofread her grants, her dissertation, etc. I wouldn't say she's more of a go-getter than I am, but she's definitely got a very different personality and a different way of going and getting. She is definitely the kind of person who's on every committee and goes to every seminar and asks questions all the time. I tend to be a bit more selective (or lazy) with my energies. At first it annoyed me, too. Then I realized that it annoyed me because I felt insecure. I felt like people would always be comparing me to her and find me lacking, and I didn't want to be her - I wanted to be me. Well, that ended up never happening. I mean, I'm sure people compare us, but I know that my advisors and professors respect me and my work separately (a good representative comment from one of my first-year professors is that I don't talk or ask questions that often, but when I do, it's something good). I also just decided that if this academia thing didn't work out with me just being the best version of me, then screw it, I was going to leave anyway. I have become less shy about asking questions in seminars and walking up to people and introducing myself, et cetera. We also have the same personal appearance thing - not in exactly the same way, but similar dynamic. She teases me (good-naturedly) about dressing up for class, always having a new handbag (it's a vice) and spending lots of money on makeup (I spent A LOT of money on makeup) while also complaining about her own looks. I've realized that some women just like to complain about their looks because it's a social/cultural thing amongst groups of women. I've just gotten used to it, and I just stare and nod and/or make sympathetic noises until they stop. (I don't participate though because I don't like to encourage micro-criticizing.) Sometimes if I feel like it I tell them that they're being ridiculous and point out something good about their personality. I don't, however, give anyone unsolicited advice about their looks.

^I did what Lisa did. It was important for me to both retain my original surname and include my new married identity in my name, and yes, I did think about how my husband felt because that's what you do when you get married - think about the other person's feelings as well as your own. My husband describes himself as a feminist and didn't care whether I changed my name either way; his main concern is that I be happy with whatever I decided. I decided I wanted us to share a surname and not have to make weird choices when we had children, and I decided that I wanted to take his surname in addition to my own. So Melissa Jane Smith became Melissa (first name) Jane Smith (two middle names) Black (new legal surname). I go by Melissa (Jane) Black personally and socially. Originally, I intended to just be Melissa Jane Smith professionally, but I accidentally added my married surname to the top of my CV (as in Melissa Smith Black) when I submitted it to a postdoc and so professionally, now I go by Melissa Smith Black. I publish under Melissa J. Smith. This has not caused me any problems. Most people put two and two together, especially when they are all listed on my CV lol. I've seen academic women with more complicated name histories, including those who have changed their surnames completely with no trace of their original names, in secure academic positions. It just doesn't seem to be a big deal anymore. I changed my name at the SS office with zero hassle, so my SS card reads "Melissa Jane Smith Black" with Jane Smith being my middle name. My driver's license says the same. My bank accounts are still in my original surname because I have been too lazy to change them (I have to bring my marriage certificate to the bank - they won't let me do it with two forms of ID, which is a hassle because who carries around their marriage certificate?) but it has actually given me zero problems. The university has my name in a variety of formats because while I never intended to change it from Melissa Jane Smith (because I wanted my diplomas in my original name since I did most of the work in my original name - this was actually my husband's idea, lol), I think I filled out a W-4 when I started working for the university in a different capacity under my new legal name (Melissa Smith Black). So some university records (mostly financial) have Melissa Smith Black and some (mostly student based) have Melissa Jane Smith and one even has Melissa Jane Black. LOL! I just kind of roll with the punches. It sounds confusing, but it's really not that confusing honestly. It's more amusing than anything else, lol. And it literally makes zero difference. I get checks made out to Melissa (Jane) Smith, Melissa (Jane) Black and Melissa Smith Black depending on which agency is paying me and what stage of my life I was when I started working there, and they always clear with no issues. I get mail to all of those names and once the doormen realized that Smith was my original name that didn't give me any issues either. People sometimes add a nonexistent hyphen and that never makes a difference either. I would imagine that once I leave my graduate institution and go to a new institution, it won't be an issue. At the university at which my postdoc will be, I am Melissa Smith Black period, and all of the checks and financial and administrative forms bear that name (also sometimes with the nonexistent hyphen). When I can only fill out one middle name, I make a judgment call based upon context. But I almost never have this problem because combined my middle name actually does have the same amount of letters as Jane Smith, and most places take spaces, so it's not really an issue. And my signature has become Melissa Smith Black (it was Melissa Jane Smith). I always sign my name Melissa Smith Black regardless of what I'm signing.

You can ask Pittsburgh if they will allow you to wait until you hear back from other schools, but they may not be willing to do that if they give you an answer by early January and you don't even expect to hear back from other programs until March. You can also use the strategy that rachelcl suggested above, although that will put you out some money. (I wouldn't suggest doing this for doctoral programs, but for MSW programs that should be okay.) I think that you need to make a priority list. Would you rather attend UK, Ohio State, or Case Western than Pittsburgh? Rank-order your schools. If you decide that only Case Western, for example, ranks higher than Pitt for you - then the rest don't matter. All that matters is whether or not Case Western admits you. So let's say Pitt accepts you in mid-January and gives you a significant scholarship package. Then you tell Case Western you have an acceptance pending and ask when you can expect to hear back from them (if it's after the deadline). If they say that it's going to take longer than 2-3 weeks from then, then you can ask Pitt if they can give you an extension on your decision deadline. If they say no, or the extension isn't long enough to hear back from Case, then you need to decide which one you want more badly. Personally I think a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, especially if that bird is funded. Pittsburgh is a great university and social work isn't an especially prestige-focused field; even if it were, I wouldn't say any of those schools is necessarily more prestigious than Pitt. What I'm saying is you don't necessarily need information from all of the schools - only the ones you want to attend more than Pitt.

Wait. Take up a hobby. Learn to knit. Start reading those books you've always wanted to read. But if you've already finished submitting all of your apps, all you can do is wait until notifications come in, so relax.

You can always file your recommendation letters with a dossier service like Interfolio, or you can just tell your recommenders that you've decided to wait another year to apply but please keep their letters on deck for you for next year. There's nothing wrong with that. Either way, you should definitely take the job.

If you want a PhD, then apply to the PhD program. If you want to get a master's first, then apply to the master's program. Your decision shouldn't be based upon which one may be easier or less competitive to get into; it should be based upon your own goals and needs. There's nothing wrong with beginning a PhD program, realizing 2 years in that you are burned out and need a break, and then taking a leave of absence. Of course, I would advocate that students who are completely unsure about whether they actually want a PhD go get an MA first and then decide later. But you sound sure that you want a PhD, just that you're not sure you want to do it right this moment. So really you could go either way. If you go for the PhD, It will be funded, and if you need to take a leave of a year (or even two) after you complete the MA requirements, you can usually do that. (Just investigate the university's leave policies - privately, through Internet sleuthing - before you commit.) If you go for the MA, it will probably cost you loads of money, but it is emotionally and administratively easier to leave after you complete the MA - for real - and take however long you need off before returning, either to that department or elsewhere. And yes, it is common in some departments for students who are compelling but not quite doctoral-program admissible to get admitted to the MA program. I would ask the department of interest if they do that. I have a friend for whom this happened at my university. Initially she intended to apply for doctoral programs in her second year of her program. As time went on her desire to do that waned more and more. Ultimately as she came near the end of her MA she decided that she did want to take some time off, so she is currently working in her field and is pretty happy with that decision. I'm a flip example. I knew I wanted a PhD but like you, I wasn't sure whether I wanted to go straight through or get a master's first. I got admitted to my dream PhD program and decided to attend. About 2 years in, I got burned out and wanted to leave...but I also got a prestigious fellowship that couldn't be deferred, so I decided to continue. I slogged through about a year and half with depression and anxiety issues along with a lot of uncertainty about whether I wanted to be here. Towards the end of year 4, though, something in me lifted and I started to feel better and more productive, and now I am extremely happy I stayed because I want a career in academia and research. So there's no way to predict how it will go, and we humans are notoriously bad at predicting our future emotions and feelings (I'm a psychologist, lol). So you just have to make the best you can with the information you have available to you now.

I don't have regret about where I chose to go to undergrad. Sometimes I wonder what life would have been like if I hadn't been a first-generation college student and I had known about financial aid - I was an outstanding black student from a financially disadvantaged family, and probably could've gotten heaps of need-based money to attend an elite university or liberal arts college. I went to a very good SLAC on a merit scholarship instead. So I wonder sometimes whether I would be taken differently if I had went somewhere more prestigious or well-known - even for something mundane as not having to explain my college to people every time they ask me where I went to undergrad ("I went to X College...it's a small liberal arts college in Y City. No, it's a women's college..." vs. "I went to Wellesley.") But then I realize that I wouldn't be the me that I am today without having gone to my SLAC, and I like the me I am. I got a lot of very valuable experiences at my undergrad. It changed who I am as a person in a very positive way and gave me values that I am proud of. Plus I need to expend energy on looking forward, as I complete my dissertation and prepare for the next phases of my professional career. So I don't spend a lot of time dwelling on it. At some point you realize - the things in the past you can't change. Whether that's your GPA or your GRE scores or that nonmajor class you failed because you skipped one too many times, the fact that you started doing research in your senior year instead of junior, or just something as basic as where you chose to go to undergrad. You made the best choice for yourself at the time with the available information that you had. Hindsight is always much clearer than foresight, but when you were 18, you had no way of knowing that you would lose interest in that field. And I'm sure that you're none worse for the wear for it - is it negatively impacting where you are now? You seem to be well-adjusted, with lots of friends and experiences to enjoy. Lastly, You do not know this, because there is literally no way to know this. You cannot go back and time and do a counterfactual experiment - go to the other college as the you you were when you were 17 or 18, and do it all over. You don't know that you would've found more fulfillment, been better prepared to grad school, or saved time. Perhaps you would've majored in something close to your old field, decided you hated it and entered a corporate position. Perhaps your more ambitious friends at the other places would've peer pressured you into trying pre-med or pre-law. Perhaps you would've struggled and failed a few classes and had to do what you're doing now anyway. You never know what your outcome would've been had you done things differently. We as humans just like to imagine that if we selected the other option that things would've been better, but there's simply zero ways of knowing that. Focus on you now, and being the best you that you can be. Reflect on the experiences at your undergrad that made you who you are. And if there is somewhere that you want to go and you need extra tools or experiences to get there, figure out how to earn those.

1. In student affairs, experience means more than degrees up to a certain point. So while you can do either, I think you should try to get a student affairs job with a bachelor's degree. The kinds of jobs that you can get with a BA are usually as an admissions counselor or as a full-time resident/hall director. (At some schools, like my university, you need to have a master's to be a hall director, but at most a BA is sufficient.) There are some other positions within student affairs that you can get with a BA, depending on the university, like academic adviser, institutional research support, community/civic engagement support, fraternity/sorority advising, multicultural affairs support, those kinds of things. 2. Yes, your master's should be in higher ed admin. It doesn't matter that your major is in neuroscience; higher ed programs accept people from a variety of majors, although it may behoove you to take a few social science classes before you graduate if you haven't already. I worked in student affairs for two years as a paraprofessional while getting my PhD in a different field, so I'm a bit familiar with the SA world.

By "psychology," you mean clinical and counseling psychology only, right? I'm in a non-clinical social psychology program that is not training me to provide therapy.

No, it's not a normal thing, but it's not uncommon. There are advisors out there like this, and I've heard that international students are especially susceptible to falling victims to this because their visas require that they remain students in programs. I'd try to talk to your advisor and ask him to give you specific feedback on what he would like you to do. Is he concerned that you aren't producing results fast enough? Are there issues with the quality of your work? Would he like you to work on different projects than the one you are currently working on? If he remains unreasonable, I would talk to the director of graduate studies. 16 hours every day is unreasonable. If he believes he can find another doctoral student who is willing to do that, let him.

It specifically says that you can skip the question if your major is in any of the listed fields. Your major is very clearly in one of the listed fields. So you can skip the question.

I also disagree with the advice to show up unannounced. This is rude, and you may find that people are too busy to meet with you or help you, which will unfairly impact your ideas towards the program. It is neither intrusive nor inappropriate to visit a department before they have made decisions. You simply email the departmental secretary (or the admissions/student affairs office of the school, if it is a professional master's program housed within a school) and say that you are planning to be in the city for personal reasons and you wanted to know if you could swing by the department to visit. Say that you would, if possible, like to sit in on a class, chat with some current students. If you want to talk to a specific professor, you can contact that professor separately and ask them, but I would only do that if you have specific questions about that professor's work and/or you want to do research with that professor in your MS program. The departmental secretary or the SA official, whoever you contacted, will let you know whether or not the things you asked for are feasible. I think you should keep your visit to 1-2 days. The second day can be more your spontaneous day - you can visit the library, tour some buildings on your own, look at study spaces, poke around the city, etc. Most professional master's programs are used to students visiting before they are admitted and welcome it, as they recruit actively. My program is actually in a professional school that has a professional master's program and we get prospective students who visit all the time, especially if they already live here. And I also visited a professional master's program before I was admitted to the school, because I lived in that city. In fact, I think my visit helped tip me into the admitted pile.

In my field, it is customary for programs to subsidize or pay for travel costs for students. That usually amounts to paying for your flights and rooming you with a grad student in the department; occasionally we put students in hotels. I know for certain that my program subsidizes travel, and I am pretty sure that our peer programs do too (I am in social psychology, and in my experience clinical psychology does this too, at least at the clinical science programs). We also feed our students, typically at least two meals a day and sometimes three depending on what happens later in the day. You may have to pay for one meal per day here. If they don't tell you up front, I would ask them directly. I wanted to visit my program before attending (I'm in a hybrid program and technically housed in the other department, so I didn't have to interview) and they didn't offer, so I asked them. While they couldn't offer me any funding, they did find a grad student willing to house me for a few days, so that took a huge bite out of the cost. And then when I told my department that they really should've brought me out to visit and interviewed me along with the other social psychology students once I came here, they actually listened and now applicants in my program who advanced to the interview stage are flown out with the other students and housed and participate in the same selection weekend. Also, if you are still in undergrad check with your home department. My department scrounged up some money to pay for my flights!