juilletmercredi

I'm pretty sure that's a myth, too. I don't remember the NSF asking where I was born, anyway, and if they do it's just to verify your status as a U.S. citizen. The NSF is granted based on your merit and impact your potential work; geography doesn't factor into it.

Applying to graduate school is an investment. All of the application fees, transcript requests, and testing fees add up. Perhaps you should hold off on graduate school until you can save the money for the fees? The only reason I suggest this is that I don't feel that you should make decisions about your future - including the rigor of your grad program - on the basis of a $170 test.

I'm in public health and social psychology. When I came to this program, I did NOT want to be a professor. I wanted to do government or think tank research. Then I thought maybe I would want to be a professor, but at a LAC. I think I drank too much of the kool-aid, because now I kind of DO want to be a research professor at an RU/VH or RU/H university. But basically, I'm open. I have a variety of careers that would make me happy - being a research professor (and eventually going into university administration), going into consulting, working as a researcher at a think tank, a government or military agency, or going into healthcare administration. The latter is difficult because, as you all mentioned, I have few documented business skills. I did do an internship with a market research firm. I think the thing that will make me attractive is my statistical skills - I work as a consultant, and I'm planning on doing an MS in statistics. Honestly, I'm planning a postdoc just so I can figure out my life.

I have no experience with any of the programs you mentioned, but is it not possible for you to wait a year or two until you are in a better position financially and life-wise to apply more broadly/widely?

Your intended field is so broad. What kind of social impact are you talking about: education, health, environmental issues, consumer behavior? What methods do you want to use? I think the latter question is the most important. You can study the same question in a variety of fields, but what changes from field to field is the methods that you are taught and the approach you are indoctrinated with. I'm in public health and we encourage a structural, ecological level approach - large-scale epidemiologic studies, long-term ethnography and interviews as opposed to - say - experiments or data mining. You can examine the exact same research question in public policy, economics, and decision sciences but your approach will differ based on the field. Even from program to program - some policy programs will take a more sociological/structural approach and some will take a more economics/econometrics focus. And you can always make up for what's missing in a postdoc. I want to learn more statistical and epidemiological methods so I'm planning for that in a postdoc. I'd say a secondary concern is...marketing is different from public policy. Public policy focuses more on public sector type stuff and you'll be doing a lot of policy analysis; marketing is more about consumer behavior and private/corporate stuff unless you go to a program that has a strength in social marketing or health communication or something. Also, although the lines are becoming more fluid, what degree you get will more or less determine where you teach. Do you want to teach in a business school afterwards, or in a school of public policy? A PhD in economics or decision sciences can get you a job in either (economics definitely, decision sciences probably). Also consider looking at programs that allow you to study bot. There's the choice of an interdiscplinary PhD (like mine, which allows me to combine a social science and public health, or Princeton's PhD that allows you to combine social policy with either psych, sociology, economics, politics or population studies). There are also less formal options - like looking at PhD programs that have a lot of flexibility in course requirements so that you can take clases at the business school or the public policy deparment, and schools that allow you to earn a certificate in another field.

My primary advisor was just three years into his job at my university when I started working with him. He went straight from college to grad school, did one year of a postdoc and then started here, so he was four years out of grad school. I LOVE him. He's great to work for. He's closer to the market so he knows what's necessary to get me a job, and he remembers graduate school so he's realistic about the amount of work I can get done in a certain amount of time. He's an absolutely fantastic mentor - I know I'll always remember him as the person who shaped the beginning of my research life in a good way. He's also very motivated to publish because he's up for tenure this year. But my timing was perfect - in the (unlikely, I think) event that he doesn't get tenure, I'll be pretty much done with my dissertation anyway. I'll also mention that because I'm in an interdisciplinary program, I have two advisors. My other advisor is a full professor who has made a name for himself in my field (to the point that when I go to my field's big national conference, people know what research I do when I mention his name). I think that if you do have a brand-new assistant prof as an advisor, it's also good to have another established professor as an advisor, too. I also have an associate prof as an informal mentor, so I kind of run the gamut, lol! I think a lot of things come into play. 1. What does the rest of the department think about this assistant professor? Is he or she productive? Does the department think highly of him or her? That can speak to how much research you can get done and whether or not they are likely to get tenure. 2. Is this person too busy to take you as a mentee? 3. Are they actually going to mentor you and not just use you as a research grunt? I definitely help my advisor get out papers, grants, and other stuff - but he is a mentor to me first and foremost, and I don't feel forced to do anything I don't want to do. His primary goal in our relationship is my development as a student. You want a mentor that is at least as invested in your development as they are in your productivity for them. 4. How is their progression going to mesh with yours? If you are planning to go to Harvard (where the tenure rate of new assistant profs is low) and want to work with an assistant prof in his fifth year, that may not be such a great idea. If he doesn't get tenure, you may only be 2-3 years into your program and then your professor leaves. But first year assistant professors aren't necessarily a great idea either, because they are still figuring out their departments and their own research. You don't want to be learning the ropes together. 5. In the event that this person DOES unexpectedly leave before you are finished, how are you going to manage that? Are there other professors who can mentor you and serve as a dissertation sponsor to you? Will you move with that person, or stay put? It seems odd to think about but my mentor and I have discussed what we would do if he left! (That's how awesome he is.) I think these are things to think about regardless of whether your professor is tenured or not, because even tenured professors get sick, have children, have elderly parents and relatives, die, get poached or just decide to do something else. We had a famous and well-established tenured professor who got his doctoral degree here leave for the West Coast last year, and I don't think people saw it coming.

Not necessarily. It also shows that you recognize the vagaries of the application process. If you send an email to the departmental coordinator asking if that's an option, I don't think it will affect your chances - if you are a really strong candidate, you'll get in regardless of whether you asked that or not.

My number one advice for people accepted to graduate school is now PLAN AHEAD. As already noted, loans work the same as in undergrad - you don't get them until after the first couple weeks of classes. Even better, you don't get the refund until after your tuition is paid, so if your tuition is paid by the school (not waived, but your school has to pay it to the university) then you have to wait until that happens before you get a refund. My university is a notorious administrative nightmare so I slept on an air mattress for 5 weeks until I got my loan money. Also, as far as stipends, the university told us we didn't get our stipend until the end of September. But again because of administrative nightmare stuff, we didn't actually get it until the middle of October. We begin at the beginning of September, so basically you have to tough it out for a month or so. So I always tell working folks to set aside some "get situated" money, and people coming straight from undergrad that they should think about getting a summer job or, if possible (if you aren't already at max Stafford loan limits to pay for tuition and stuff), borrowing some loan money now and setting it aside so that you can use it later.

I think your research interests will always evolve. My research interests now, and my intentions for my postdoc, are very different than they were when I first entered. They're definitely within the same field and even the same subfield, but the population and some of the predictors have changed. I think when your research straddles two subfields, it's very easy to think that you went into the "wrong" subfield. The problem is your view is very narrow now, while still in the graduate program. I know a developmental psychologist who is now a quantitative psychologist, some social psychologists who have become cognitive psychologists and even a developmental psychologist who teaches in a biology department. It's very likely that you'll finish your program in social psych and go do a postdoc in more cognition/perception stuff, and become a social cognitive researcher. I think that if you find your program really inadequate to give you the tools to learn to do what you want to do in the future, then you can consider leaving. But if your research is just moving a little away from your interests and you have side interests that you can't pursue yet, you should probably stick it out. Everyone does something a little different than what they want to do in grad school, because you're working for a professor and not independently yet. I've heard that your interests converge more with what you're doing in a postdoc, and even more when you are actually working as a PI.

I don't think it's realistic to treat it like a 45-hour-per-week job, but you don't need to work 80 hours every week to make it work. I'd wager that when I still had coursework I was working 60 hours a week on all things combined, and now that I don't have coursework it's closer to a 40-50 hour workweek if I'm being productive (and 30 hours if I'm not). I remember feeling very stressed out and after my third year, burned out a bit too. I feel better now, I'm just really tired of being in graduate school! It's true that if you don't take time for yourself you start to feel resentful and productivity slides. What I do is I scheduled in one free day per week. My fellow graduate students always marveled at that - how do you avoid doing work on Saturdays, they asked me? Easy - I just didn't do it, unless it was absolutely necessary or I chose to take another day off that week. Eventually I stopped feeling guilty for it.

Hi! I'm getting my PhD in public health (sociomedical sciences, specifically) at Columbia. I find it very odd that the doctoral application wasn't open on 10/18. The due date was December 15 when I applied 5 years ago, and it's probably around the same time. You don't apply for the PhD through SOPHAS, though; you apply through the GSAS application, which is on the GSAS website here: http://gsas.columbia.edu/apply.

Always try, I think. You can rack your brain to think of smaller things you might have done - for example, although I did have significant volunteer experiences in college, I also highlighted how I tutored people on the GRE for free (mostly friends). Broader impacts also has to do with the impact you plan to make in the future. Not only did I talk about my past efforts, I also talked about things I wanted to do in the future to make an impact on the science pipeline (teach statistics, mentor younger researchers). Your broader impacts also have to do with the broader impacts of your research itself, so start thinking about how your research proposal has an impact on the human condition. The other thing is, you may want to start doing a little outreach now - nothing huge, but maybe mentoring or tutoring or volunteering? It's rewarding! I agree that the feedback in itself is a good reason to apply. You can improve yourself for next year!

If you are just now in a radiology program, and haven't even graduated yet and worked as a radiology tech, why don't you work for a few years first? You are right in assuming that you will need a master's to advance in the hospital's hierarchy, but you will also need work experience. And a lot of MPH programs (especially in healthcare administration) require or recommend work experience. And you certainly won't get a job as a mid-level administrator without experience. If you have solid years of work experience and a solid GPA in your radiology tech program, that should overshadow a low GPA in an unrelated bachelor's. I really, really encourage you to work for at least two years before pursuing a master's. Public health is my field, btw. But as far as getting in, it's true that MPH programs are as concerned about work/internship experiences and passion for the field as they are about grades. It's a professional degree; they don't just want people who can get As but people who want to change the world and advance public health. Your statement of purpose is going to be important in conveying your passion and your resume of experiences in your AS program are important, too. But you only have one year of those, at the moment, which is why I urge you to consider working for 2-3 years before returning for another degree. You'll be more hireable, then.

There's not much difference between a 2.97 and a 2.98, so I don't think it matters whether you truncate or round. I also think that you are wrong about the way that most professors would react - most of them are regular people who also have loved ones, and would work with you on that. That's neither here nor there, though. I think that it's appropriate to talk about your high school research experience. It sounds like it was serious research, and perhaps not that long ago for you. You can talk about what you did and how that first sparked your interest in mathematics research. I've also heard that mathematics PhD programs don't always expect undergraduates to have research experience because you don't have enough mathematics knowledge yet to do any research. That is not my field so I am not sure of the veracity of that statement, but I've heard it very often from graduate students in math (mostly pure math). The GPA thing - first of all, if your university is a top-ranked university known for a tough math department, your admissions committee will probably be familiar with that and forgive a certain level of lowered performance. One way to prove that you can handle graduate level classes is to take some graduate-level mathematics courses at a nearby university. How strict programs are on the 3.0 cut-off really depends on the school and program, but if your 2.98 also reflects low performance in major courses you may face difficulty at PhD programs and top MA programs. You may want to consider aiming for a good-fit MA program to prove that you can do grad-level work. I still think you should apply to some choice PhD programs to see if you would be admitted, though. As for discussing adversity in SOPs, the advice I've always been given (and sounds good) is that if you discuss how something impacted your grades, it should be a situation that was acute, severe, and in the past. A bout with a serious illness for a semester or a year that tanked your grades, but is resolved (either because the illness is gone or because you have it under control)? Fine. Becoming the primary caregiver to a family member or partner going through end stage renal failure is also something that would qualify. But the problem here is - like an above poster, I am a bit incredulous that a 19-year-old became the primary caregiver to a significant other (not to a family member like a parent or sibling, or even an uncle or cousin) and I imagine that an admissions committee would too. And the other problem is that this either lasted throughout your entire college career and tanked all of your grades, or that you had other problems that contributed to a low across-the-board GPA. If you decide to address it, you shouldn't spend more than 3-5 sentences on it, I think. Nowhere near the level of detail you included here is necessary. Quickly explain that you don't believe that your undergraduate grades during X period are reflective of your actual abilities, because during X period of time you were the primary caregiver for a relative/partner with end stage renal failure. This relative/partner required round-the-clock care which obviously put a strain on your grades. But that problem is resolved for Y reason, so you will be able to fully devote yourself to performing at your maximum potential in classes. And then move on to discussing something that demonstrates that. I've found it helpful to think of a personal statement as an academic cover letter. In a cover letter, you don't spend too much time dwelling on the negatives but focus on your positives, only briefly mentioning very big negatives that may require explanation. Is your major GPA any higher?

Depends on the program and department. I'm in an interdisciplinary program that straddles two departments. In one department, RAships and TAships are automatic and part of the funding package - everyone RAs, and everyone TAs at least one semester a year. In the other department, they're both more of a voluntary thing. While almost everyone RAs for someone, not everyone TAs, and TAships are additional pay on top of the funding package. You do have to apply separately for those. Also, outside of the department there are opportunities to RA and TA that aren't automatic and do require separate applications. Sometimes departments run short and advertise to other departments that they need TAs.

I've never been diagnosed with depression, but I'm pretty sure I have it - or at least some mild cylical form of it. It definitely gets in the way of my ability to study or work, because some days I don't even feel like getting out of bed. I just want to shut out the entire world, close my eyes, and disappear. You can get help for that - I'm assuming if you are diagnosed you have a therapist you are seeing, maybe even taking medication? Plenty of people with depression get through graduate school. I make a point of working hard when I'm feeling okay so that when I go through depressive episodes, I don't fall as far behind. (I like the way the above commenter's sister puts it - when you work really hard when you feel better, people tend not to notice as much when you aren't working and depressed because they assume you've worked at a steady clip the whole time.) I've found that it also helps to let people I trust know about my depression, because they check in on me when I go MIA. They don't just assume that I'm hard at work. As far as organization, I was a fairly disorganized person before I came to graduate school. I quickly learned how to organize myself enough that I've been very successful. I write EVERYTHING down - I always have a notebook and a pen with me because I'll forget in like two seconds. I have schedules everywhere. I save every article that may be remotely useful into my reference manager. Things like that. You learn a system that works for you. I don't have children, but I know many graduate students who do and who get through the programs just fine.

Bs? *scoffs* I had one semester in college with an F and two Ws, all in my major field of study. I had a 3.4 GPA and I got into a PhD program, top 10 in my field. You will be absolutely fine with a few Bs and a 3.8.

QUIT. Graduate school is difficult enough on its own. The job doesn't seem like it's adding anything to you either financially or developmentally. Fast food deals with high turnover all the time, and in this economy they will easily find someone to replace you. Quit and don't even dwell on it.

I think that there are some academics that are socially awkward and isolated from the real world, but I've mostly found that myth to be untrue in my neck of the woods. My professors are amazingly complex people with real lives and real interests outside of their jobs. They do love their research and their work, but they often use it to improve the world around them (but then again, I am in public health. That's the point). I also have a kind and caring advisor and lots of professors who care about me. They're the ones, ironically, who kept me sticking around after I decided multiple times that I wanted to leave forever. Honestly, I think these things (the fact that academics are regular people, or reflecting on where your work stands in the larger conversation) are all harder to see and do when you first begin. You're so busy trying to balance coursework, research, the paranoid buzzings of the advanced students on the market looking for jobs (OMG, you mean the market SUCKS?) - and you're possibly stressed out and terrified and wondering if you made a terrible mistake. I remember feeling that way my second year after the newness wore off. You also can't really gauge the social implications of your work yet because you aren't really familiar with the entire body of it and the conversation between scholars that has been going on in your field. I remember feeling like a huge lightbulb came on after comps. It gets easier to take time to reflect and realize the value of what you are learning after you finish your coursework and really dig in. Now - after coursework, and especially since I am on external funding - I feel like I have the luxury of only taking on what I think is important to my personal development instead of jumping through hoops, and I do have more time to reflect upon what I want my mark to be and how I want to make it. Studying for my comprehensive exams was actually a deeply enjoyable experience for me, which I know sounds crazy! but I had months on end to read seminal works in my field and think about how a few players changed the game for everyone and attempted to decrease human suffering, and where my own work and interests lie in that field. Doing the study helped me learn and understand more in my field but also helped me solidify my own research interests. I do think that sometimes, students imagine grad school to be this odd mythical paradise where they will sit around and read important books, discourse with learned scholars about abstract theories, and never worry about money and food and all those banal things. The reality is VERY VERY different. I mentor students and I do my best to disabuse them of that notion (I hope the very presence of seeing me doing something besides reading and toting a crate full of books around does that). We're normal people with normal lives and desires, including eating and sleeping. Sometimes it absolutely sucks. But other times it's really nice, and surviving it is an exercise in holding onto the really nice feelings while slogging through the increasingly long "really sucks" parts.

I'm in a similar spot to you, but 26 and nearing the end of my PhD. I wish I had taken some time off before entering the PhD to travel abroad, teach English in a foreign country, mess around a little. I'm wondering whether it'd be possible for me to do that after my PhD and then come back, do a postdoc, and get on the research track (I'm not particularly interested in academia, so that helps). I'm just kind of dealing with things as they come, though, which is a tremendous triumph for me - a person who tries to plan everything down to the minute. Can you sort of do both? Get a summer job that involves traveling? There must be summer law internships abroad for people who are interested in international law/justice/policy, yes? Can you take a leave of absence for a year to do a Fulbright or teach abroad or backpack or whatever? (If I weren't so close to completion of my PhD, I would do this. In fact, I wish I HAD done it after my second or third year of grad school.) People take all kinds of winding paths to their careers. You may not get the most plum corporate jobs or judicial clerkships if you do, but I'm sure taking a few years to teach English abroad won't completely shut you out of law jobs forever. Perhaps speak with some working lawyers in the fields in which you're interested, and get their take?

I agree that it could be depression (I went through a few bouts and I couldn't get anything done), but if OP is a new grad student it could also just be adjusting to a new workload and not being familiar with how many hours one needs to realistically work to get things done - as well as just being unused to making one's own schedule. That's my biggest struggle, not depression (which is rough) but scheduling myself and actually sitting down and doing what I said I was going to do when I said I was going to do it. I've found that it helps me to make deadlines and find people who will hold me to them. I'm really bad at structuring my own time when I have vast swaths of it (weeks or months) and very big projects (write this paper!), but I am exceptionally good at making deadlines if they are for short chunks of time (1-2 weeks) and pacing myself when I have smaller tasks (write intro section; finish preliminary analyses). I'm very tasky and not at all big picture. So when I'm writing a paper with someone else, we talk about deadlines and I set some, then turn in the work to the person at the deadline. Even if that person doesn't even look at my draft/work at that time, just knowing someone is expecting it is enough for me to get it done. My advisor is great and has helped me by holding me accountable to my deadlines, but it's very independent - I give him a reasonable deadline, and I email the work to him, but he doesn't check on me. So maybe you can work out something independently with your advisor, or create a writing circle with another student(s).

as i said of course she doesnt HAVE to like her, or be friends with her, I don't like some of my flatmates ( that's putting it mildly actually), and while Im staying put this year there's no way I would live them again, I certainly wouldn't have my bf and me live with just one other person we didn't like , i think that's unfair on the other person and would probably wreak my own head too This depends entirely on the person. Some people are okay with that, and it's not unfair if they've agreed to it and all parties are okay with it. Living with someone you don't like because the rent is cheap isn't "using them." OP, now that you are in your new city you have time to look for an apartment for your bf and you - and you don't necessarily have to hold yourself to a question you asked when you first moved in together. In the meanwhile, recognize that your roommate - like you - is also homesick and probably having a difficult adjustment to graduate school, and may be "annoying" because of that. Maybe cut her some slack?

Can you take a leave of absence instead? Most universities allow students to take a leave of absence for any reason; if what you're dealing with is an acute problem that could be solved in a semester or an academic year, you can always return later and resume your study. But if you have to completely withdraw from the university and start later - I mean, I don't even know how grad programs would even know that except for a gap on your transcript or years that indicate some skipped time. Even still, as long as your grades are very high (and they are) I don't think it will be a problem.

You have to be enrolled in an ELIGIBLE master's program for this to even begin to work. A non-thesis master's is typically not a research-based master's, so it's not eligible. Also, since you'd be in a BS/MS program and still technically an undergraduate student at the majority of institutions that do BS/MS programs, you might not even be eligible for the award that way. The reserve status clause for flexibility is intended for graduate students in research-focused programs (primarily PhDs, might I add) to do RAships that pay and save their NSF monies for when those RAships dry up, not for people to go off and do something different and come back to their graduate program. You still have to be enrolled in the program itself and progressing towards completion. If you want to do the BS/MS at your institution, do it, then apply for the NSF next year when you apply for graduate programs.

Since you already have an MA and some work experience, why not come back to the States and work a few years in government or public policy - perhaps education policy? Then you could spend some time doing some informational interviewing and seeing what degree the people who do the work you want to do have. You have to think about the job first, or the variety of positions that you want to go after, and then think about what degree you need to do that job/variety of jobs - not the other way around. The other thing is that there are a lot of JD/MPA or JD/MPP programs, where you can get both degrees in 4 years.