juilletmercredi

If I had to choose a student as a grad student in a research-focused program, especially if I had to pay them as an RA, I would rather take a student with a 3.54 and two research projects than a student with a 3.66 and 1 research project. There's really not all that much difference between a 3.5 and a 3.6, honestly.

I'm in social psychology & public health, and most of my research experience was in developmental psychology before I attended grad school. I/O is related to human factors work, so you should still apply.

3-6+? My (psychology) department only offers funding for 1, perhaps 2 conferences a year for even our best doctoral students, and even the top fellowship programs offer little to no travel funding. I personally attend 1-2 national conferences per year. I will attend regional conferences if they are within driving distance and I can reasonably attend them during the day, then return home.

I suffered a bit after I passed my qualifying exams (both sets). Studying was just an emotionally draining experience. The summer after I passed the second set, I literally did nothing related to my degree progression). And I did very well on both exams, but it's such an intense experience! Personally, I've never understood the idea that oral exams are supposed to break you. I do believe that they are supposed to test your limits, but my oral exams were more like a conversation between colleagues. My examiners genuinely wanted to know what I thought about my field, and what theoretical basis I had for the direction of my research. It was a satisfying experience - terrifying at first, but satisfying. But yes, afterwards I was so drained that I took the entire summer to detox. I really only got back on track in September of 2012 - I took my oral quals in May 2012. Graduate school is so emotionally draining and difficult. I think people know it will be cognitively difficult, but few are prepared for the emotional toll it takes on you. It's like an emotional roller coaster.

It doesn't make sense that other PhD students in their fourth and fifth years would have to finish before she leaves or [i[start over. If they're in their fifth year, a substantial portion of their dissertation research should be finished; they should have a committee with someone who can step in to see them through the end. Even a fourth year shouldn't have to start over completely, although they may have to significantly shift their dissertation topic and perhaps take an unexpected extra year. It sounds like your PI either 1) was untenured and didn't get her contract renewed for another year or 2) was tenured, but demoted - like from associate to assistant - and chose to leave. You shouldn't have to start over, though. Your coursework is nearly done, yes? You may have to switch to a different dissertation topic, but given that you aren't even finished with your coursework you shouldn't be that far along in dissertation research anyway. Why would this significantly delay your time to degree? I think you need to discuss this with your Director of Graduate Studies.

Eh, it depends on the move. In certain cases where the student graduates from his original institution, those are usually cases in which the student is an advanced PhD student (past coursework and comps) in the dissertation phase. They typically stay enrolled at their original institution, but may move with the PI and work as a research assistant or project coordinator at the new university while still officially a student at the old university. They fulfill the old university's requirements and graduate with a PhD from the original institution. It usually doesn't take them additional time. However, when a student is earlier in their career - still in coursework, or just finished - it's a bit trickier. I've also never heard of a student transferring to another university but receiving their PhD from the original institution. I would apply for admission and then if you are admitted, begin to ask those questions - will you be expected to retake coursework? All of it or some? Only then can you make your decision. Talk to your advisor, too, about how the logistics would work. Then you have to decide for yourself how the switch would impact your career. Transferring won't, most likely (your CV will say University B so most likely they won't know) but whether the subfield and the additional resources/network at the new university will benefit you. I must say that personally, if my advisor had switched schools after my 2nd or 3rd year and transferring would've required me to retake coursework, I wouldn't do it.

Why don't you have a polite but direct conversation with your advisor about your needs? Explain your concerns to her in a mature, adult manner, and be prepared with solutions that require effort on your part as well as hers. If she reacts badly, then it's possible that you are simply not compatible.

To answer your original question, I think in the fine arts it's difficult to get community college jobs nowadays. There's a lot of competition for them. Most CCs don't have drama or dramatic writing programs, and the few that do probably have pretty fierce competition for those jobs. The most successful ones will be people who have written plays in production and teach classes on the side. If you plan an MFA in the field, your best bet is to widen your expertise. Learn to teach intro to English composition or some rhetoric classes - anything that's a "service" class in English - and get as much teaching experience as you can without derailing your degree.

Well, this is a tricky situation...I have heard second- and third-hand stories of older academics getting tenure-track positions after completing their terminal degrees later in life, but it is true that many academics will engage in age discrimination. They'd rather hire a young assistant professor who they perceive will have a longer time in the field/at their institution, and whom they won't have to replace soon. It's particularly sticky in the arts, which is an oversaturated field anyway. There are plenty of MFA graduates of all ages competing for tt jobs, and even getting such a position at a CC is difficult. So are there jobs? Yes, there are. But the competition for them is stiff, and there are no guarantees there either. Disclaimer: I am not in the arts.

Lastminutedeals.com. I've found some pretty incredible deals there. But I also use Kayak.com and I've found the best flight prices there.

Your program should have a director of graduate studies; in this situation, you may want to reach out to that person for help. They may appoint you a temporary advisor or let you know how much your absentee advisor will have input in the process. I would also definitely email your advisor, introducing yourself and letting her know that you're looking forward to working with her next year on your thesis, and that you're currently in the process of identifying your topic and want to know if she has any guidance to offer. Perhaps you can come up with a broad area first and try to get her assistance in narrowing it down.

^What everyone else said!

A data blitz is this new thing social psychologists are in love with; it's when a bunch of different presenters give a 1-2 minute presentation on recent research and their findings, sometimes accompanied by 1 slide but usually unaccompanied. I think they started doing blitz sessions at SPSP and so now they're spreading. The idea is that you hear a little about someone's work and you approach them later to get the full story. If it's this early in the season and you haven't seen an acceptance letter yet, I would assume it's a round of informal interviews. They do want to recruit you and get you to consider the department, but they also want to evaluate how good of a fit you are into the department. So I would bring your A-game, as you've already planned to. I will also chime (generally, to everyone) that them covering costs is not indicative of the stage of the process. In my field (social psych, actually) it's customary for the university to bear at least some of the costs for interviews, but it's very much a part of the selection process and being invited is not guarantee of admission. In fact, the last year I participated in the process (2010-2011, I think) my lab interviewed 4 people and only admitted 2.

I'm hoping that I can earn the master's while doing a postdoc (there's a program like that at Penn State). I actually enjoy doing problem sets - it was realizing that I enjoy problem sets that made me want to get the degree. I wish I had had the opportunity to earn it while I was getting the PhD; there are many universities that have that option for students in the social sciences, and if I could go back in time I would use that as a consideration when choosing programs.

I think it's all subjective - a lot of people find statistics dry and boring, but I really like it. In fact, I really dislike probability but I love multivariate analysis and regression techniques. Practically speaking, this is a great way to go. A master's in statistics is typically 30 credits, so a full-time program will only take you about a year. There are many MS programs in the field that are designed for working professionals now, and a few respected programs online (like Penn State's). The actuarial field has many openings; statistics is an in-demand skill so you very likely won't be without a job. And there aren't as many professors in that field either, so your path is not unrealistic. On a more subjective level, though, be careful that you aren't falling from the frying pan into the fire. Have you done any statistical consulting or actuarial type work? It can be very rewarding (I, myself, am planning to earn an MS in applied statistics so I can start a consulting business on the side of my academic work, because I love it).

Both. I've seen and heard about professional academics (from the little-knowns to the big-wigs) getting a bit loose at conferences, but a lot of productive and scholarly work goes on at them, too. Conferences are pretty work hard/play hard in my field.

With a master's, you can't be hired as assistant faculty in the US - assistant professors have PhDs, too. You could theoretically be hired as an instructor, lecturer, or adjunct, but probably only at community colleges unless you are in a shortage field (like nursing). But I agree with the above in that you shouldn't attend a PhD that is not at least partially funded. Personally, I would not attend a PhD that is not fully funded - and by that I mean either the university provides funds or there is a reasonable expectation that you will be able to make up whatever the shortfall is (ex. in my program the university provides the first 3 years of funding, but nearly everyone finds some external source of funding for the remaining years, including myself). It also depends a lot on your field. Nursing and accounting professors are in high demand. If you get a PhD in one of those fields or another like it, you're very likely to get a tenure-track position in some place that is desirable to you and be able to repay your loans. But if you want to be a professor of English literature or American history, it's more of a gamble.

There is a difference, both academically and socially. Like comp12 said, the academic one is a shift from external motivation to internal motivation. More than that, college is less of an independent endeavor. You have a pretty much prescribed course of study; you have a little choice within it, but generally there are a lot of people there to give you a lot of guidance and careful shepherding into adulthood and a BA. Graduate school is not like that; it's much more independent. Sure, the courses are outlined in the handbook, but most of what's important in grad school isn't printed in the handbook and nobody will tell you unless you know what to ask. You have to really want it to get through it, especially academic/research grad school. And socially, college students have a lot more free time than grad students. I didn't realize exactly how much free time I had until I didn't have it anymore. You may never have that much free time again in your life, unless you're able to retire. So there's a lot more filling that free time with social pursuits - parties, mixers, all kinds of socials. You have a lot less time for that post-undergrad, regardless of whether you go to grad school or not. The secret is, of course, that you don't make a seamless transition from UG to grad mindset. It's not like you step onto campus on your first day of grad school and instantly have the wisdom of a grad student. It takes time. I don't think I felt truly independent/capable/"like a grad student" until my fourth year. I certainly didn't feel that way in my first two. The other thing is that you're still going to be yourself, regardless of whether you're in grad school. I like organized social activities and I missed that from college. It took me a while to realize that if I wanted them I'd need to do them, so I've taken it upon myself to join groups and participate in, and organize, those social activities. I also missed all the community service I did in college, so I've started volunteering in my spare time. I can't do as much of it, but I can do it.

I spent about $50 on my desk chair. I have chronic back pain, so I would love to spend $300 on an ergonomic chair but unfortunately that's not in the budget. I got this mid-back chair from Walmart, honestly. It's not the most terrific chair in the world, but I sit in it for probably about 4-6 hours a day and it takes some time before my back starts aching. It's this one: http://www.walmart.com/ip/Leather-Mid-Back-Chair-Black/6560497 One of my goals in life is, once I'm done grad school, to buy some ridiculously expensive desk chair for my home office.

I'm not in the humanities, but I'm in a social science field in which people frequently do international research. And yes, grad students do typically find time to go abroad if they need to for their dissertation research. I have several doctoral student friends who have gotten funding to do fieldwork abroad. However, you usually have to find funding for it. Most of the students I know got Fulbright full grants to go abroad, but there are a variety of other funding mechanisms for it. I don't see any scholarly reason why you shouldn't take that year abroad, though, especially if you need French language in your research and this will help you strengthen your skills in that area. I don't know your individual circumstances so I don't know whether it would be foolish for you to pass it up, but I don't see any reason why you should feel like you shouldn't do it. Graduate school will still be here when you return.

-She pays out of pocket -She doesn't do any research…in 2 years -Her clinicals are only 4-5 days every few months There are some doctoral programs (typically not PhDs) that are more practice-focused than research, but even in those the students do at least a bit of original research. However, your relative doesn't even sound like she's getting proper clinical/practical training. I have friends in clinical programs and they do clinical work several times a week. So no, the degree isn't worth anything - she certainly won't get a tenure-track academic position or get hired to an institution like the VA or something to do clinical work. Her program may not even be APA-accredited; even if it is, she'll probably be limited to private practice at the very best. However, if this is the first exposure your family has had to doctoral studies, you may never be able to convince them otherwise. I too have a working-class family who doesn't really understand the whole academic thing. They simply won't. You need to learn how to just let this roll off your back and continue on your path with your own determination. If you must, one way that you could try to do it is to clarify that her program is focused on preparing clinical practitioners, whereas yours is focused on producing researchers, therefore it's different.

^I agree with Ablukhov re: the trains. There's a reason so many Craigslist ads list the subway lines different apartments are by; they play a huge role in how much time your commute will take. It looks like the CUNY School of Law is nearby the E, M, 7, and G. If you live in Brooklyn along the G the commute should be relatively easy, and Long Island City itself is a pretty affordable area in which to live and is becoming more popular. Hoboken can be a relatively easy commute - you can take the PATH train in to the 33rd St stop and then get on the E at 34th. I'm not really sure how long that would take. Harlem would be longer - you'd have to ride down into midtown and then probably switch trains at 42nd or 34th to take the 7 or E there…doesn't make much sense, honestly, when you could live just as affordably in Long Island City, Astoria, Sunnyside, etc. However, I do disagree with the food. It's not cheap. However, I do live in the Upper West Side (blech) so that may have a lot to do with it. Only get an unlimited Metrocard if you find yourself using the trains a lot. I live near my campus and don't take the trains as often anymore and so I do not get an unlimited Metrocard anymore. If you decide to move to LIC, you may not need one. As for loans…look at the cost of attendance estimates from your college. I would say that if you keep your living costs low you could comfortably get by on $25K in loans per year. The income-based repayment with the public loan forgiveness option stipulates that if you work for 10 years in an eligible public service job and make all of your IBR loan payments ON TIME every month, you can have any remaining balance of your federal loans forgiven. Only federal loans are eligible (Direct loans and graduate PLUS loans, as well as federal consolidation loans and federal Perkins loans). However, all of your payments have to be on time. If you miss even one payment, you can render yourself ineligible. My only other thing…I took had dreams of moving to New York and feeding off the creative energy and excitement (not a musician, just love cities). I quickly grew tired of it. Not that it wasn't (and isn't) fun - it is, and there's tons of arts and cultural things to participate in. I love that, and you will enjoy it. But the thing nobody tells you is that it's all so expensive, and a lot of times you aren't going to be able to do everything you want to do as a grad student - unless you take on a lot of debt, or a lot of extra work. Plus I'm tired of living a shoebox arranged on top of and surrounded by other shoeboxes for the same price that I could be paying for an entire 4-bedroom house in my hometown.

In my discipline (psychology), having sole-led classes as a graduate student is not the norm. Most students serve as teaching assistants. Sometimes having sole-taught classes over the summer or as a postdoc happens, but if all candidates are postdocs most probably haven't sole-taught a class in my field. We do, however, usually lead our own discussion or lab sections - usually in undergrad statistics or research methods. Most psychologists teach their first class as instructor of record as either a postdoc or an assistant professor. I think in the humanities it's more common for students to have sole-taught their own class. If you are in your second year, though, you have plenty of time for that. Focus on completing your coursework and your exams now, and consider this a blessing. When you're ABD, you may be able to adjunct at a nearby college for the chance to teach your own class.

This sounds unethical, honestly. It's using money to lure students into making hasty decisions, instead of allowing them the full amount of time to consider their options and compare packages. It also sounds like it may be being used to disguise crappy packages or other internal problems in a particular program or department. If a program's package and offerings are good enough, they shouldn't need to offer a signing bonus. The program and package's merits would stand on their own. I've never heard of this before, and I think I would have an automatic prejudice against a program that did this.

If you hate it, LEAVE. Life is far too short to spend 5 years miserable and absolutely hating what you do. Leave your program, and if you still want to do research, go do a master's degree in your area of passion and then apply for PhD programs later. Professors understand that when they are taking on students, they are taking a risk. Do not feel guilty for having to leave just because he is paying you. People leave jobs they are getting paid for all the time. If he's insulted by you telling him that the program is not for you, and you are leaving to pursue your interests, that is a personal problem on his part. Seriously, go ahead and leave now before you get too invested.