juilletmercredi

If you are 100% sure (or close to that) that you want to get a PhD, Vanderbilt is an excellent university and you should go there. I'm looking at NRC rankings for the two universities in your field and they don't even seem that far apart.

Personally, I would believe the grad students (especially multiple ones) over what the PI claims wrt amount of time spent and accessibility. Academics tend to be people who enjoy spreading themselves thin and often don't realize when they are spread too thin. This may not be as much of a concern for you, though, if you are a more independent student. My advisor is very busy; although he can always make time to meet with me if I request it, I request it less often because I prefer to be left alone to work as I see fit. My PI also does not have tenure, but I like that because it makes him "hungry" and we have done a lot of good work together. Are you interested in conducting research abroad? This isn't that common across psychology (certainly not in my subfield), so that would be less relevant unless your research has significant international connections or implications. If you're using experimental or computational methods I don't see why you would be doing significant research abroad. Greater resources, though, may translate into more travel funds to go to conferences and things like stats packages, computers, that kind of thing. Also, a new program can be a con as well as a pro. More established programs don't necessarily mean more complacent faculty; they can mean faculty who have really invested in the success of the program and the program already has a proven track record of success. Newer programs are less tested and may be riding on the success of a few people there; if they leave, the program may tank. (Unlikely, but possible.) Research is king, so I would be leaning towards School B - more resources, a wider range of methodologies, and an admitted chance to do more research. However, you do have to consider the shortcomings. Classes can be misleading; there may be fewer classes on theory and computational methods, but can you *learn* those things there other ways? There aren't many classes in my department at all but I've learned so much here through working with people and teaching myself things with mentorship. Really, that's the way academics learn after a certain point. Can School B make up for that weakness through mentorship and seminars? Also remember that if they have better resources, they may be able to pay for you to take summer classes or attend a summer institute at APA or Michigan's ICPSR or a similar program to learn those methodologies. Ask about that. Student happiness is important, but you only interacted with 2 students. Is that two out of 3 TOTAL students (because that's a problem, then!) or just 2 out of the 3 students you interacted with? And why are they unhappy? That's important. If they are frustrated with the way their PI treats them and the lack of opportunities in the program, that's bad. If they're unhappy because the location is remote and they want to date, or because they've had interpersonal problems in the department, then their experience may be less relevant. However, my comments are only based on the information that School B would allow you the chance to do more research. If you reassess and don't think that's actually true, then I think School A may be the slightly stronger winner here.

Personally, I would follow the money. NYU Poly is a well-respected engineering institution; you shouldn't have a problem getting employment from there, and I doubt the extra leverage Columbia SEAS could offer is going to be worth the extra debt you'd go into unless NYU's aid is so small as to be irrelevant.

No. I don't think there's a significant difference in post-grad school opportunities within the top 20ish schools. What you do will be more important - publish, network, present.

If Syracuse has given you funding, I would rule out Columbia and wait until you hear from UCLA and NYU. I think it's fine to let them know that you have been accepted to Syracuse with funding and ask if they have made any movement on your file.

Follow the money. What you do in grad school can often be more important than where you go, and with Fordham you will have zero debt plus an internship with the UN and a fellowship that could lead to a job. I think you would be crazy to turn that down.

I don't know how common it is, but I've definitely heard of it happening. It's not madness. It doesn't make sense to go somewhere and spend 5-6 years when you aren't excited about it, especially if your interests have significantly shifted. Personally, I think it makes much more sense to take an extra year to figure yourself out and make the changes necessary to get into a program you really want to attend than it does to attend a school that you don't really want to attend, running the risk that 2 or 3 years in you'll realize you've wasted your time and you really want out. I especially don't think that you should go to a program thinking that if you hate it, you can just quit. Quitting is emotionally much more difficult than people expect it to be, as evidenced by several posts on these fora. I've struggled with feelings of wanting to quit pretty much since my third year of my PhD program, and I am finishing up my fifth. At this point, I'm simply going to finish because I only have the dissertation left and I actually enjoy writing and data analysis, but if I was at the same place at the end of my 2nd year as I was now I would've left then. It literally took me 2 years to get to feeling like it was "ok" for me to leave if I wanted to. Attending just because you can't figure out what else you'll do is also a terrible idea. Graduate school is hard enough without apathy.

What is your discipline? What are your job prospects from the PhD program vs. the MA? The PhD program would be the clear winner, because it is funded and your ultimate goal. But do graduates get jobs? If the PhD program can get you the jobs you want, then go for the PhD. If not, then I would take the year and apply to other programs. I wouldn't attend an unfunded MA.

It depends on you and your advisor. I communicated with my advisor via email a bit during the summer before I started my program - he gave me the study protocol of his lab's new project (which is, incidentally, what I'm doing my dissertation on now!) and recommended some summer reading.

This is not my field, but just by looking quickly at the websites, the LSE/USC program seems to be geared towards people who want to work in the industry and focus on global/international communication, whereas the NYU program seems geared towards students who want to do scholarly work on media and communications and proceed to graduate programs. (I only gleaned that from the overview: LSE emphasizes USC's connections to the Los Angeles media industry and the USC page emphasizes professional development, with most alumni going into jobs directly after; NYU starts off by talking about contemporary theory and key debates.) Do you want to pursue a PhD directly after the MA program, or do you want to work for a few years first? The LSE/USC program may aid you in working within the media industry better, but the MA program at NYU may be more geared for preparing you for a PhD program in the field.

Also depends on your fund$. I have the time to take 3 big trips a year, but not the money. Depends on your advisor, too. My advisor doesn't care where I do my work from, as long as it gets done.

ON a completely objective note, doing an REU will be better for applications to PhD programs than Google or Microsoft or another software internship. You will be doing research that will be very similar to your expectations for grad school, and you will get a LoR writer out of it who does not go to your undergrad, which is always a good idea. On a more subjective note, I regret not doing things that were not tied directly into getting admitted to a grad program once I decided I wanted to go to grad school. You only live once, and who knows, you may decide to change your mind next year or two years from now, and who knows where an internship with Google or Microsoft can take you? Maybe you decide halfway through your grad program that you want to go into industry. Maybe you decide to hell with it and you want to drop out. Or maybe one of those people you meet at Google leaves Google and ends up starting a start-up that needs an applied physicist. I don't know. The first two summers of my college career I spent as a camp counselor because I needed the money. I spent the summer before last (as a PhD student) as an intern at a market research firm because I wanted to try it out and see if I liked it and wanted to leave academia. You have to do some things to try them, I think.

No, you can't market yourself as equivalent MA grad. Plenty of BA graduates do honors master's thesis: I did one too. The process was similar (although I began my senior year, I had to submit a proposal, get IRB approval, collect my own data, analyze it myself, and write up the results). Some schools require all of their grads to do one, like Princeton. It will be useful in showing that you can complete an independent research project on your own and useful in that you will have a writing sample to show. And no, it being in progress is not a problem. This happens very often. By the time you apply, you should have a proposal completed; you can show that. I did not use my senior honors thesis as my writing sample (I used another paper) but I did make reference to it.

It depends on the school. Some schools don't defer for any reason (like Columbia; they state on the GSAS page that they don't do deferrals, although they are required by law to do so for military service and would probably do so for extreme illness or family issues). Other schools will only defer for things like illness and military + research awards, like an NIH post-baccalaureate or a Fulbright. Still other schools will defer for things like Americorps or Peace Corps or whatever. You have to ask your department. Generally they are more amenable to anything that is going to make you a stronger grad student, like a year of research or a prestigious award or something.

How many years total of research experience do you have? You listed 3 years, but are they overlapping? That research grant you won. Were you the principal investigator on that grant? Or did your advisor win the grant and you are just on it? (If it is yours to claim, that is a very very good thing.) You do, of course, have a reasonable chance of making it into a clinical psychology program - by which I mean you are an average to above-average candidate. You may get in, and you should certainly apply. But do note that many outstanding students (3.5+ GPA, high GRE scores, 2+ years of research experience, strong letters of recommendation, etc etc) apply to clinical programs and don't get in the first round. I had a friend in college who applied to 12 clinical programs and had excellent stats - including 3 years of experience, 2 sponsored by the NIMH - and still didn't get in. Don't let that discourage you, but just realize that you may have to apply more than once and that you may have to take 2 years off post-college to get some research experience. Many clinical applicants (especially to the top clinical science programs) do that. So far you are doing everything right. The only things you can do now are get a good GRE score and continue to do research.

I wouldn't bother. It will be obvious looking at your transcript that the classes that brought down your average were the pre-med classes, and library science programs won't care that you did badly in organic chemistry. I agree with the above. My cum GPA was a 3.42 and my major GPA like a 3.6; I am in a very competitive field, so I didn't apply to any PhD programs except one, my "dream PhD program." I assumed I wouldn't get in anywhere else without a master's first. Lo and behold, I got into my dream PhD program. It ended up working out beautifully because this program is perfect for me, but I wish I had had more confidence in the rest of my application (which was actually pretty outstanding - even my advisor said so, and apparently my application was handpicked by the chair of my department) and had applied to other places. So don't sell yourself short!

I like the thinking that an SOP is like an "academic cover letter" for grad programs, so you want to present yourself in a positive light and promote positive images of yourself, not negative ones. So it's better to say that you discovered what you are passionate about rather than you arrived at your area by process of elimination. I considered a lot of experiences when drafting my SOP. I kept trying to find ways to shoehorn in my study abroad experience because it Changed My Life and I was really excited about it (I had just come home when I was drafting my SOP), but it wasn't as relevant as other things so I ended up cutting it out. I think I realized that things that may have been epiphanies for you aren't necessarily going to translate on paper because you may not have words to convey how life-changing they were, or they may have been more internally life-changing. I focused on my research experiences primarily - I had had several up to that point, so I talked about my progression from my first research experience (in which I discovered the wonder of research, even though my research was completely unrelated to what I wanted to do in the future) on through until I narrowed down what I really wanted to do. So…no, it's not really compelling to hear "Well, I don't like clinical work so I decided to do this instead." Presumably you considered many paths aside from research before you settled on that. Edit that part out and start at where you discovered you really liked research and decided that's what you want to do. Reinforce that by explaining your experiences and how they solidified that desire, and then talk about how X University can help you strengthen your research skills and get to your goal of a productive research career. Also, it kind of sounds like (from your most recent comment) you are trying to explain away something you perceive as a shortcoming. Don't do it; plenty of people realize that medicine is not for them and switch. I think you should spend the bulk of your limited space describing your passion for psychology and your interest in the *particular* interdisciplinary fields that your program is in. You want to sound passionate about interdisciplinarity without sounding disorganized or indecisive.

Possibly, but that depends on what your MS is in and what MSs in your field are like. FWIW, I applied to MPH programs (typically professional degrees, with students who typically want to work directly after) with statements very similar to my PhD statements. I was very clear about wanting to apply to PhD programs after I completed my MPH and that I wanted to do research while I was there, so I highlighted the research strengths of each program and professors I'd want to work with just like I did with the PhD program I applied to. However, I also threw in some references to the professional development these programs offered, such as centers and internships or practica. I got into all the MPH programs I applied to, so I think it worked. I think it would really depend on the program. Although an MPH is a professional degree, a lot of MPH graduates end up doing research professional since the engine of public health is research, so that's not too out of line. But if I had applied to an MBA or MPA program saying I wanted to do research, I might not have gotten in. If your MS is research-oriented in a field that is also research-oriented, your SOP will look more like a PhD one.

The GRE's analytical writing is a joke compared to actual writing in graduate school. It's basically a grown-up version of the 5-paragraph essay - they want an introduction (tell us what you're going to say), three examples (although it can be 4 or 5 or two paragraphs on one - but basically, 3 examples supporting your argument) and then a conclusion (summarize). The first sentence of every middle part paragraph should be a very obvious transition sentence with a very obvious transition word. If you follow this formula, write a lot, and write very plainly/clearly, you will get a 6.0. I got one and I actually had to dumb down my writing from my normal style - I consider myself a strong writer. They don't actually want thoughtful academic writing; they want basic, easy-to-read, easy-to-grade writing. A lot of strong writers don't do well on AW because they write like academics and not like 10th graders. There's a professor who can predict SAT writing scores just by looking at the length of the paper with near-perfect accuracy. I didn't even finish my conclusion on one of my essays and I still got a 6.0. I think I made up some stuff on the second essay because I couldn't think of a legitimate third example. The essay readers literally have 2 minutes to look at each of your essays (I used to score SAT ones for Kaplan when I tutored for them). They don't have time to fact-check and they don't care if your facts are wrong or even if you straight up make up stuff. When I used to tutor for the SAT writing section (which is essentially the same thing), I always told my students that if they couldn't come up with a legitimate example to just make something up: they could say their dad was the first man on the moon and the essay graders don't care. They aren't actually reading your essay; they are scanning for key things: transition words, examples, an intro, a conclusion, a simple argument. If you make it easy for them they reward you with a 5-6. If you make it difficult, they don't want to take the time to look for it, they're going to award you a 3 or 4 and say that your essay was too complicated/not clear. I hate hate hate both GRE and SAT writing sections because they reinforce BAD WRITING. There are very few times in which someone will be asked to come up with a cogent essay in 25 minutes. I have to keep drilling into my students' heads "Now use these techniques ONLY for the SAT. PLEASE do not write like this at school." But to be fair, there aren't any 24-year-olds grading the essays. The graders are typically English/writing professors or the equivalent.

I don't wear a suit even if I am presenting. I wear a dress or slacks or a skirt and a button-down shirt or nice blouse or sweater. If I wear a skirt or dress, they're always at or just above the knee and I wear stockings or tights; and then I just wear some professional looking flats or relatively low-heeled shoes (nothing above 3" - walking around conferences in teeny tall heels is hell). I also hate bringing more than like 2 pairs of shoes along, so I usually pick a bunch of outfits that work with black pumps/kitten heels or maybe 2 that work with that and 2 that work with a different color shoe (navy, cream, something neutral. I don't buy brightly colored shoes, lol). I also buy my pants for flats! All my pants stop right at or right below my ankle. I hate dress shirts because they always feel so stiff and the ones that look tailored on me are always too tight around my boobs. But the ones that work the best for me I find at Express on sale (if you catch a sale, you can get them for $15-25 a piece). You can find some dress shirts that aren't the traditional button-downs, though; Express has some, New York & Company has some. Maybe H&M? They're hit or miss as far as dressy clothes go for me. I don't have a problem looking my age because I look 17 in the face, so even if I dressed matronly I would probably hit my age at best, lol. But I think going for more modern cuts and fits is the way to go, for that. Slim-fit pants, jackets that are cut higher (so they hit at the hip instead of the thigh) and have shorter sleeves (maybe three-quarters length instead of full, especially in April), light-colored or printed shirts, and kitten heels or round-toe flats instead of severely pointed shoes or really high heels. I would only wear a suit if I were interviewing.

I love Kate Spade as well. I have a nylon computer bag that I bought from the Kate Spade outlet for $178; it is black with white polka dots and I got compliments on it from other academic women at a conference I attended recently. It's very professional looking, and it's like my go-to conference/interview type bag. It's big enough for my computer and iPad plus a folder, notebook, and my purse accessories (wallet, keys, phone, chargers, hand sanitizer, lotion). Kate Spade has a lot of nylon options that are cheaper than her leather bags, and if you look in the sale section you can often find really good deals including bags under $200. My most recent bag purchase and my new every day bag is the Go Round Tote from Vera Bradley. Normally it's $86, but it's currently on sale and I got mine for $65. (Vera Bradley has sales quite often, especially when they are trying to get rid of old prints.) VB makes all of their totes and satchels out of quilted cloth; I have quite a lot of pieces from this designer and they last a good long while. Plus if they get dirty, you can throw them in the washing machine. I had a "Vera" tote that was my 'everyday' bag and my complaints about it were minor; it's a huge spacious bag that you can fit tons in, with deep inside pockets and a few outside ones for purse type stuff. I also have a laptop bookbag from this designer (normally $109, I think I got it on sale for like $60) for when I want to carry things on my back, like if I have a lot. Anyway, that's how I know that her stuff lasts forever - I've had my two for over a year and a half and they still look brand new, so they definitely function like brand new. No ripping or tearing at the seams, no fraying at the edges, and the straps are still securely attached to the bags (VB sews their straps quite a ways down the bags and sometimes all the way around, so there's less of a chance of the straps breaking). The Go Round Tote I like a lot because it's big enough for my computer and it has more outside pockets than inside ones, which I tend to use more. Today I carried my laptop (13" MacBook Pro) and my iPad as well as an umbrella in there, and I had room for maybe 1 or 2 books or some notebooks as well plus my pencil case on top if I wanted it. I stuffed some pens into one of the inside pockets. My outside pockets had my phone, keys, wallet, mouse, laptop charger, iPod, earbuds, hand sanitizer and lotion plus probably some other stuff I don't remember. It's the perfect size for me, and I think the print (Ribbons) is both fun and professional enough for every day school/classes/meetings kind of stuff.

It depends on the city you live in and how much you plan to cook from home vs. eat out. In my household, with just my husband and I, we cook at home anywhere from 2-5 nights per week and like to have a few snacks on hand but not too many. We drive into northern NJ to grocery shop because the grocery stores in NYC where we live have ridiculous prices; originally we intended to go once every two weeks but we really only go once per month. We probably spend around $300 a month on groceries, all told. When I lived with a roommate but didn't share food beyond milk and a few other staples, I spent around $200 a month on groceries. You can spend less if you live in a lower cost-of-living area and prepare more food from scratch (when I lived with a roommate, I think I cooked maybe 2-3 nights per week, and sometimes I ate microwavable meals that cost more money than cooking from scratch).

I think it would be enough. I really wish I had gone with an Air myself. I had the same concerns, and I went with the MacBook Pro 13" with the 500 GB of HDD space. However, in the last year I have acquired two external HDD (one is a desktop 3 TB drive and the other is a portable 1 TB drive) that I use to store all my movies and space-intensive goodies that I don't use on a regular basis. Most of my important school-related stuff is on the cloud (Google Drive, which is incredibly easy to use AND means I can access my work from any Internet-connected computer, like if I wanted to go work at the library or something) and backed up on the desktop drive. So I could easily get by on 128 GB, although I would probably go for a 256 GB SSD. I carry my computer EVERYWHERE (seriously, I'm on the WiFi in a McDonald's right now) and I could use a 2-pound reduction in its weight. Also, the SSD means it will start up more quickly. The only thing I would maybe worry about is processing power/speed with inteisve data analysis software; sometimes even my Pro doesn't really like SPSS. My Dream is to have a 27" iMac at home and a MacBook Air to carry around with me, and then just sync everything over the cloud. But that is for the future when I have The Monies. (I am also just being lazy, as I have a 23" monitor at home that I hook the Pro up to, but I'd just prefer to have the iMac and not have to re-hook up when I come home, lol.) I have also used the optical drive a grand total of once (to install SPSS, which I could've done online if I needed to). Also, I had this IPS vs. other technologies concern when shopping for an external monitor earlier this year. Honestly, I concluded that it really doesn't matter; the average user won't notice the difference. Unless you're doing a lot of photo editing or web design or something artistically intensive, normal monitors work just fine for most people. Also, the Retina display 13" Mac is 4.5 lbs, whereas the MacBook Air 13" is 2.96 lbs. Even rounding to 3, that's a pound and a half, not a half a pound. I've read some reviews on Windows tablets (I was gonna get one for my sister) and actually read that some folks think the Windows tablet-laptops don't function that well as tablets. They're great laptops, apparently, but not necessarily good tablets. Consider a full-on tablet, like the Galaxy Tab 10 or the iPad. I have an iPad and a MacBook Pro and I can often carry the iPad and my keyboard when doing lighter work like reading articles and taking notes on them or taking notes in class. Android tablets are cheaper than the iPad. I know the big draw for the iPad is the iCloud syncing, which is nice, but there are other ways to make your Mac sync with Android. I use Google Drive, some people use Dropbox. I needed more storage and Dropbox's extra storage is ridiculously expensive. I pay $25 a year, or $2.50 a month, for 25GB of cloud storage with Google Drive. Plus I can view online and use Google Docs, and I got additional storage for my Gmail account. Win win! I only have an iPad because it was a gift and I got it before all the new tablets were out on the market; if I were purchasing now, I would get a less expensive but just as good Android tablet.

You may need to do an MA/MS in psychology and show that you can handle graduate-level work.

True, it depends on your school and where the funding comes from. NIH fellowships require 12 months of payback for every 12 months of received stipend; your "payback" can be another 12 months of working on NIH-funded research as well as a variety of other things, but a person who dropped out in year one could potentially be liable for that. I've also heard that some programs are starting to maybe look towards requiring payback for students who drop out pretty early, so I'd check on it. Generally speaking, the vast majority of programs will not require you to pay anything back.