juilletmercredi

In case you haven't decided yet - personally, I'd go with Hunter. NYU does have the better overall reputation, but assuming that you are staying in New York or the mid-Atlantic in general after grad school, Hunter is well-respected. But the biggest thing is that MPH graduates can't really expect to make a salary sufficient to pay back the roughly $120K in loans you'd have to borrow for an NYU degree, assuming you don't have financial aid there (and that's a conservative estimate of $40K per year for tuition and fees and $20K for living expenses. Living will probably be closer to $25K unless you find a really good apartment deal). Even if you have a job that will pay for your living, $80K is still steep.

From an objective standpoint, either one will serve you well. I'm in a social and behavioral sciences department at a school of public health as a PhD student, and most of the scholars here are either anthropologists or sociologists. Much of public health theory draws on both of those fields, and there's a lot of overlap. I had an advisor once tell me that many fields allow you to answer the same questions; the difference is the approach that you will take. Given that my program is a hybrid of anthropology, sociology and psychology at it's core - and that I work side-by-side with anthro and soc students every day (I'm a psychologist by training, and 50% of my program is psychology coursework), I'd say that's true. We ask similar questions. As to audience motivations and behaviors, either anthro or soc will allow you to explore that, but the way you approach it will be different. Sociologists do use qualitative methods, but they are more likely to use quantitative/statistical methods than anthropologists. (Many of the sociologists I know here do qual studies or mixed-methods studies.) Also, I've noticed their qual methods are different - sociologists are likely to use interviews, group interviews, and focus groups and less likely to use ethnography and participant observation (both of which are basically immersion into the environment you are studying). You're also going to approach the question from more of a group dynamics standpoint. Anthropologists almost universally use qual methods, and are likely going to encourage ethnographic exploration and participant observation, and are going to approach questions from the standpoint of cultural investigation. I've heard it told like this. Psychology looks at the individual or very small group level - as in, how do individuals behave? Even social psychology looks at individual behavior as influenced by social groups; social psychologists are not concerned with the behavior of the group so much as they are concerned with the individual within the group. Sociology looks at the large group level: how do schools, neighborhoods, racial groups, genders "behave"? Sociologists are not so much concerned about the culture of the group as they are in subgroups within the culture. Anthropology takes it out another step and looks at how entire cultures operate (but an entire culture could be the culture of a drug gang on a particular block or the homeless people who congregate at a particular corner - when I say "out" I mean relative to level of analysis, not size). On the flip, they're not interested in individuals; they are interested in what individuals say about the larger cultural structure. (Anthropologists and sociologists, please correct me if I have mussed your fields!) From a subjective level, I preferred sociology. This is predictable, because I am a quantitative social psychologist. Number one, I don't really get ethnography and participant observation as research tools (I took a class on qual, and I did well, but I still don't "get" it in the sense that it's a method I'd use). This is also going to sound a little stupid but anthro is a lot more "free-flowing" a discipline as far as theory and method go; the anthros I've talked to firmly believe in allowing theory to develop from the content of the study and the data, and in letting the best method unfold in the doing. They often scout out their populations for weeks or months (or even years!) before deciding on a method, and they will change their methods to best suit the situation. (These are all positive things, I think, even though they are pretty much not what psychologists do.) Medical sociology was really helpful to me as a social psychologist because again, I study individual behavior, and I thought it was important to know about group functioning and theory there. I also started out as a sociology major in college and switched because it wasn't "sciency" enough, so that should tell you something about my motivations I think either one will be an interesting journey, but if you're looking for more...science, sociology might be better (although anthro is a science too, although a hard science major might not see it as one). Anthro will give you some really good tough theory that is also very useful (Oh how I hated theory...but I do appreciate being able to just spit it out).

I wish I had learned about quantitative psychology before I went to grad school, because that's what I would've done (I'm in social psychology with a very heavy quant/methods focus). Quant psychologists are in very high demand, not only in academic departments (if you are willing and qualified to teach statistics and research methods...your chances of getting a job go way up. Seems like every job posting asks for that, and seems like no one actually wants to do it besides me, lol) but in industry too. AS an additional note, ETS has a summer program for quant and educational psychologists interested in psychometrics and assessment - might be interesting. Also, APA has a whole section for those interested in quant psych: http://www.apa.org/research/tools/quantitative/index.aspx

there's no way for her to not know how much money I bring in from any job. Yes, there is. You are over 18. Get a bank account in your name, and when you get paid deposit your check in there or get direct deposit, and then don't share the account number or the balance with anyone. Don't even leave a copy of the account number at home where she can find it. And if she asks, refuse to tell her. There is literally no way that she can find out what the account number is or what your balance is unless she does something illegal like misrepresents herself as you at the bank...or unless you tell her. She doesn't give me money, but I do live with her. I guess that means she can decide where I go to school since I'm not contributing to the rent (I can't with no job anyway). It does not. No one has the right to force you to do anything you don't want to do - go to grad school, hold a specific job, etc. I know it's hard to realize when you are in the midst of such abuse. But NO ONE can decide where you go to school, or whether. If you stopped going to school today and just dropped out, what could she do? Nothing. Maybe kick you out of the house, but that might be a positive thing! I have a LinkedIn account with my work posted...never once have I gotten anything from there. Most people don't get job offers through LinkedIN...they don't just show up. You may make contacts on LinkedIn that can help you when you apply for a job, but jobs don't fall into people's laps like that unless they are quite privileged. At the very least, I believe some of my private loans will get forgiven when my mother dies since she's my co-signer. That's not the way co-signing works. As a co-signer, your mom agrees to pay the loan only if you default. She's like a guarantor. If she dies, you are still the primary debtor and you will still be responsible for paying the loans. She's just a little extra guarantee for them.

Ah, the Mac vs. Windows wars. They never fail to amuse me. awvish, do you have access to a university? I know that my university has Windows 7, Windows XP and Mac OS installs available for university affiliates for just such purposes. I do want to say one thing, though. You do not have to pay someone else to regularly "tune up" a PC. Here is what they are charging you $50-100 for: -Tests the hardware and software on your device to see it it works. That means making sure the CD-ROM drive opens and whether you can still open Word. -Gives you an estimate for any upgrades that you may "need". Which means a sales pitch. -Removes unnecessary programs. -Installs new updates (which your computer can do automatically). -Removes dust from your computer (buy some canned air). -Defrag your PC. These are all things you can do yourself, even if you aren't technically savvy. Don't let people rip you off by telling you that a PC needs a regular tune up that only they can do. That definitely should not account for the price differential between a Mac and a PC.

Honestly, even though it is 60-70 hours, it IS nice to be able to choose which 60-70 hours you want to work as far_to_go says. If I wake up feeling like crap on Wednesday morning, I can sleep in until 10 am, and read some articles and make some notes and that's work. I can sit in bed with my laptop on my lap and blow my nose and take DayQuil. There aren't many jobs out there that will let me do that! The flexibility is one of the reasons I stayed. I'm going to disagree with csychology's mom though. Most of the grad school forums I've seen are accurate representations of real life. Grad school stress is real life, grad school related depression is also real life, and not everyone here is here to seek help - some are here to give it. And the problems I've seen people have with their programs here are typical problems that a lot of graduate students have. And no matter how much you love your program, there will be something about it that you hate enough to ruminate and rant about. I'm also going to disagree with whoever said that you can't hold down a job while in a grad program. The problem isn't graduate school; it's expecting to be able to take off for weeks to complete your dissertation or a graduate project. If you're going to get a part-time job in the later stages of your grad work, you either need to be able to blend it to work with your dissertation writing, or arrange it so that you can quit a few weeks before your defense. Any job is going to want to fire you for taking three consecutive weeks off, regardless of the reason. But there's no reason that you'd have to take off four times a year: the idea is to manage your time so you can work the job AND complete the program, or just don't get a job.

Hi everyone! I'm going into my 4th year at Columbia *waves* welcome! Erin, if you don't get UAH housing, I don't think it will be difficult to find a shared housing situation. There will be a ton of graduating students vacating their apartments over the summer, and there will be a ton of incoming students looking for other roommates to share with. See if your department sends out a list of new students? I found my roommate on the waiting list for CUMC housing; she emailed all of the women on the list. Try Craigslist too. I found my last two roommates through Craigslist.

I'd do the field experience and make room in my schedule to do the language in the fall. I'm all about getting professional experiences that may lead to other opportunities down the line. However, the caveat is that I am in a field that doesn't require languages and so I don't know how hard or easy it is to pick up that language during the year. I don't know if Rosetta Stone would work because it emphasizes speaking and listening, and most of the time in grad programs when you need languages you need reading.

I've never heard of a place where an A- was an F. There are some places where an A- signals that you didn't do what the professor expected, but that's because an A was the standard and anything below that was regarded by them as subpar work. I think most places are more or less on the scale Bison posted, with a C being a failing grade, indicating a need to retake the course (if it is required) and possibly meaning academic probation. Here a B- is the lowest you can get without some discussion of your standing in the program.

In such a situation, the universities naturally like to admit such students for a funded Humanities PhD who would complete the PhD. If a student is inclined to change programs, a university may decide that it's better to give a fellowship to someone who wants to complete the PhD, because funds are scarce in the Humanities. This is true of any field, though. I'm in the social sciences and no one would admit a student they suspected didn't want to complete the PhD. Also, I think across fields the chances of being required to pay back funding, regardless of the source (fellowship, TA, RA; institutional or external) is very, very low. In the social sciences students often spend the first year on fellowship, too. It just depends on the program. My very sciency social science program fund students through the grad school and not individual grants. A student may want to ask if they are really worried about that but I doubt it's going to be an issue, ever. Most programs realize that some students (sometimes up to 50% or more) are going to leave the program for various reasons. I've never heard a case of anyone across fields who has been expected to pay back their fellowship regardless of why they left - either to go to another program or just not to finish the PhD at at all. That said, in my field if you transferred programs most likely the new PhD program would make you take all their coursework and exams. It's sometimes possible to negotiate not having to do that, but I found that that's usually when advisors are moving to new programs and bringing their old students with them - the advisor negotiates that for you. Often students are not as able to do that. I have a friend who transferred to my program because of advisor issues; he was finished with coursework at his old program and our program made him start from square one. Anyway, I wouldn't do it at this point (having finished coursework and passed one set of my comprehensives), because of the strong possibility I'd be expected to retake courses and exams, but also because of the knowledge that if I want to shift research topics considerably I can do that in a post-doc in my field. Students often do post-docs in related subfields or interdisciplinary areas to boost their research in one field they are interested in but haven't done before.

Can some of you please elaborate on navigating department politics. What to look for, who to ask, what absolutely not to do, horror stories, whatever Politics: Academics are a genteel bunch, generally speaking. They usually won't say anything outright negative about other people (partially because it's such a small world and that person might be on a committee you're on next year - or even better, on your grant or tenure review committee). Look for the veiled references, the awkward silences, the pointed omissions. Ask current graduate students, too, before you tie yourself to someone because they are far more willing to be frank with you about your advisors. As a grad student, having a powerful advocate for you within the department is great. Assistant professors can be awesome but they generally cannot fulfill the role of a powerful advocate. My advisor is an assistant professor, but I have another official advisor who is a full professor and an informal advisor who's associate. Their contacts in the university have been invaluable in helping me through some bureaucratic nightmares. One example: I TAed in the department my full professor advisor is appointed in and partway through the semester, I was told I would not be compensated (long story). I fought the good fight with financial aid on my own for weeks getting nowhere. I mentioned it to my advisor and within two weeks the money was in my account. Work with people who can advocate for you. My advice: -I'm gonna go the opposite of snarky and say *don't* volunteer for stuff. It depends on your department culture, but volunteering for too much can add way too much on your plate. -Don't lose yourself. Grad school has a way of taking you over and taking the joy out of a lot of the things you would otherwise rather be doing than work, because you feel guilty about not doing work just about any time that you aren't doing work. Find a way to beat that feeling and maintain who you are. Hold onto cherished hobbies, read a pleasure book every now and then, allow yourself mindless reality television or whatever your guilt is. -Corollary to above: Decide right now what you are willing to sacrifice for this degree and the requisite career after it. What is important to you? If you have to list it out on paper, do that. Now think about which of those things you are willing to give up in exchange for quality of your work and career. Good research takes time; great research takes more time; excellent research takes even more time and being a superstar takes most of your time. Realize that there is NO shame in realizing early on that you do not want to be a superstar. -Sometimes, the best advisors aren't the ones with the closest research to your own but the ones you get along with the best, and who are really dedicated to getting you up and out. -A paper will never be good if it's not done. -If you are interested in non-academic jobs...find out what you need to do to get them, and do those things. Don't let anyone (advisors, colleagues, etc.) browbeat you or persuade you to drop your non-academic aspirations, if you know that the professor life is not for you. I've found that advisors have unrealistic expectations about the ease with which their students will get tt jobs after grad school. -If you have health insurance and need to see a therapist, use it. You'd probably be surprised to know how many people in your department are battling mental health issues and talking to therapists. (Everyone in my cohort is or was.) Grad school threatens that mental health. Work on it. -I agree with the chair advice. I already had chronic back pain when I came to grad school and grad school has made it worse. However, a decent chair helps a lot. I didn't have the money to spring for a $300 desk chair (that will be the next step though, maybe next year) but I did get a $70 one from Wal-Mart that gives me pretty decent support. I can't sit in it forever, but 4-6 hours is usually all I want to sit there for anyway and I can usually get through that pretty comfortably. (The education school here has EXCELLENT desk chairs in their meeting rooms - they feel like sitting on a cloud, and my back doesn't even notice them. But I'm sure they were like $600 a piece or something, lol. That's what inspired me to get a mesh chair next time I buy a chair).

Realtors depend on the city; in my city realtors are great because finding an apartment sucks here, but the two problems is that they are expensive (they want 12-15% of the years' rent and that can easily be $1500-$2500 in this city (on top of paying security, first, and sometimes last month's rent) and that they mostly have more expensive listings. I also haven't had good relationships with rental agencies because they'll list their units on Craigslist as no-fee when they actually are, or they'll advertise that they are no-fee when they do charge fees, and yes, they do lie about neighborhoods ("Upper West Side" can easily mean in the 140s, which is Harlem, or even the 160s, which is Washington Heights.) The less expensive apartments are often by-owner. I've found that Craigslist is more than sufficient for finding places here, as most of the grad students and young professionals I know vacating places list their units there. Also ask the departmental secretary if she has any listings (in both of my departments the coordinators pass around sublets and for-rent units for grad students) and your uni should have an off-campus housing office, who should be able to at least give you listings for affordable off-campus apartments. That's how I found my excellent unit, and ever since when I've needed a roommate I list it on Craigslist and get one within a week or two. The summer before grad school, I saved money from a loan I borrowed in the fall and lived on that. I stayed at home with my parents, which saved a lot of money. I was coming straight from undergrad though so that may not be an option for those of you who are not.

I got mine monthly (last day of each month) for my first year. Then my uni switched to biweekly. Now I'm on an NSF and it's dispensed 3 times a year (September, January, May) which sucks. Definitely save up for the first month's expenses. And perhaps a little beyond. My university's bureaucacy is HORRIBLE and for the two years I was on institutional funding, I got paid 2-3 weeks later than they said I would. So my first year I was supposed to get paid Setepmber 30 and it didn't happen until around October 20. My second year I was supposed to get paid September 15 (because I was on 12-month funding and I had gotten my last paycheck August 31) and I didn't get paid until October 1-ish. Lambspam is right, that first month is ominous. Save up as much as you can, but some schools have emergency loan funds that are specifically to cover this kind of crisis. They are typically small (mine was limited to $500) and need to be paid back in 30 days. I don't think relocation expenses are at all common at the graduate school level. Maybe at the post-doc level. All told I think my relocation expenses were between $3500 and $4000, but I live in a high-cost city.

It's sort of unusual for a future student to call a professor in the beginning of May to ask about registering for courses...usually that's handled during the first weeks or so at uni. I'll also just say that early May is a prime time for grants to be due, final papers to get graded and final rades to be due for graduation, so it's entirely possible that he's really busy and unable to talk. Also, like others have said...professors often don't know requirements anyway. Just as a personal example: my advisor is a really great guy, and I like him a lot. He's an excellent research mentor. He's also an assistant professor trying to get tenure who teaches a 1/0 load and is on a soft money schedule (which means he pays most of his own salary). He doesn't know what courses I have to take and I don't really blame him, lol. If I have a specific problem he can help me solve it by asking around, but it's generally expected that grad students (especially PhD students) are going to be reading the handbook and getting the prereqs and stuff from there. I came up with a list of courses for the semester and explained how they satisfy my requirements and how much work they entailed (assuring him that they wouldn't interfere with my research). That was it.

It depends on the culture of the program. In one of my departments (psychology) virtually everyone lives within a 5 minute walk to campus, in university subsidized housing. The uni is in a large city and owns several apartment buildings in the vicinity of the uni's main campus, and students rent them at lower cost than it would cost to rent an apartment in that very expensive neighborhood. It's also important to note that this department's research requires a lot of lab work, so students are in the lab 4 or 5 days a week for several hours. Most social events happen in that neighborhood and on campus, so staying connected with the department is sometimes dependent on being there. It's pretty easy to get an apartment through the grad housing for this branch of the campus; anyone who applies basically gets one. On the other hand, my primary department is located on the medical center campus of the university and graduate housing here is poor - both in quality (the ones by the main campus are WAY nicer) and in availability. Most people who apply for housing don't get it, and so most of the doctoral students live commuting distance from campus. My colleagues generally commute anywhere from 20 minutes to 1.5 hours to get to campus every day on public transit (no one drives). Given the interdisciplinary nature of my program, I took 50% of my classes and did about 30-40% of my research and advisor-related work on the main campus and did the other half of classes and the greater proportion of research on the medical branch. I live a 10-minute walk from the medical center but a 30-minute commute on public transit from the main campus, so I have experience both ways. IMO: you do what you gotta do. If you want to be here, you do the commute...I was excited to go to my main campus classes and events so it was rarely a burden to commute down there (and that was in BIG part because of public transit. You don't have to think). Also it depends on the neighborhoods and quality of life. I have some friends who live 1.5 hours away from the med campus, but they live in Brooklyn and one of the reasons they move out there is because Brooklyn's a diverse borough with some great neighborhoods. Sometimes it's a cost issue - few of my friends at NYU live in Greenwich Village; they tend to live in Brooklyn because it's the cheapest close place. Queens and Brooklyn and upper Manhattan have cheaper rent rates as well, so sometimes it's about being able to afford the neighborhood. The surrounding area around unis tend to be expensive. Sometimes I wish I lived farther away. I'm always here. I feel perpetually available, and perpetually 'at school.' It is convenient for traveling to courses and stuff, and I will agree with hejduk that being able to come home for a break or for lunch is a big plus. But I also agree with fuzzylogician that sometimes that commute can help you get prepared for whatever it is you're about to do. Especially once you finish your coursework and aren't necessarily there every day...moving away is no big deal. Unless you have lab work.

Assuming that you are serious about this...we have no idea why your advisor called you a waste of money, and we have no idea whether you actually are a waste of money - especially given the very few details you've given us. Nonetheless, even if you ARE a waste of money in her eyes saying it to your face is very unprofessional, especially if it did not come along with any indication of how to improve. I think you should talk to your DGS about the matter.

Another advantage to doing a master's thesis is that you have experience writing a paper that is an example of the kind of advanced scholarship you will be expected to do in your field, especially for your dissertation. Sometimes the experience is almost as important as the product. I did a senior honors thesis in undergrad (and I came to a PhD program straight from the BA) and a lot of the skills I learned writing that thesis (writing a proposal, pacing myself, IRB approval, recruiting subjects on my own, solitary data analysis) have been really useful in my program so far and will probably be really useful when I'm writing the dissertation. I'm going to agree with runonsentence somewhat...two years is a short period of time to complete what's usually 45-60 credits and also do a polished thesis. My school has master's students complete their thesis in one semester, which IMO is nowhere near enough time to carry out a well-thought out, well-written thesis - and it causes a lot of anxiety in the students.

I'm in a doctoral program with funding. However, I've often experienced that professors will tell you that you cannot work or that something is too intensive for you to work...sometimes they are absolutely right and it is, and other times they are not. Also, I've also realized that when it comes to discussing stipends with professors, they sometimes come from this odd position where they've forgotten what it's like to be a student - particularly struggling to pay living expenses in a high-cost city - and have unrealistic expectations about how much you should live on. I have had a lot of friends complete master's programs here. Many of them borrow all of the money they need for tuition and fees. Some work full time while completing the degree, and they do it despite it being intense. Others work part-time ~20 hours a week, which is doable (and here they generally take 4 courses a semester, or 12 hours, as well). Some do some combination of both. If you are going to be teaching I am strongly against working PT. Teaching (even just TAing) is very time-intensive, especially on top of a full load of courses. (For reference, I TAed an 80-person lecture course with one other TA, took one 3-credit course, plus had a 20-hour/week RAship, last semester...it was plenty! But I think you should also see if you can talk to previous or current students and see what they're doing, since a lot of this is going to be program specific.

Did you take time between undergrad and your master's program? It really depends on your field and your inclinations. Personally, while I do not regret coming to this PhD program I do regret not taking some time between undergrad and grad school to fulfill some dreams - world travel, teaching abroad, that sort of thing. I often advise people who are vacillating and who ask me to take some time "off" between undergrad and doctoral studies, or master's programs and doctoral programs if they didn't take any time before. It's up to you. I can't really tell whether you are asking whether you should pursue one at all, or whether you should pursue one now. It just really depends on you, and your readiness to pursue graduate work, and what field you are in and able you will be to do the things you want to do after you graduate with your PhD. In one of my fields work experience is nothing but good. In another, it's viewed as extra 'space' between you and research and people may doubt your passion. So it's sometimes field-dependent. The answer to the GRE question is also somewhat field-dependent, and also depends on what you mean by so-so. In one of my fields (psychology), a 1200 is the accepted standard for getting into a PhD program. So if an applicant had a score significantly lower than a 1200 - let's say lower than 1150 - even if they had a master's I would advise them to retake. And even an 1180 will keep you out of some programs that have a firm 1200 cut off, like my own - my DGS openly told me that they do not look at applicants that come with a GRE score of less than 1200. So I'd say browse the websites of programs in which you are interested and get a feel for what their average and/or expected GRE scores are. If there aren't any, find some schools that you may not be interested in but are similar to your program in caliber and see what *they* say. Another resource is asking the departmental secretary. I find that professors have some weird ideas about academic diversity. I've heard the 'no studying at the same undergrad school before', but never 'don't study in the same state'...I think that's kind of ridiculous. Two universities in the same state may have completely different academic atmospheres - there are so many universities in New York City, for example, and I don't think they share too many similarities. My university is probably more similar to some in other states than it is to some unis here. However, I think that for a PhD program you should be pretty location-free. If you are serious about an academic career, you're going to need to be portable; even if you don't want academia, PhDs are best done when you can go to the uni that's the best fit for you research-wise, advisor-wise, and personality-wise. Assuming that your husband is in good standing, he can transfer to a uni in your new city. How you choose a field depends on what YOU want to study. I've heard it said that you can answer the same questions from different fields, but what changes is the approach you use. That is to say, sociologists, anthropologists, and cultural psychologists do a lot of overlapping work but they take different metholodigcal and theoretical approaches to those subjects. I chose my degree because it's an interdisciplinary psychology and public health degree. I like to use social psychological research methods to answer my questions but I wanted to interrogate from a public health perspective, so I chose this degree. I think it's silly to expect academic diversity on the graduate level in people's degrees, because graduate work builds on previous work. A computer science major isn't going to suddenly go do a PhD in English literature without some serious prep work, you know? So much of doctoral work is predicated on prior knowledge that it'd be difficult to complete the degree without a background in the field, and I don't think there's anything wrong with going into the same specialization for your PhD as your MS if that's what you are interested in. After all, there's a reason you attended in the first place.

All of this depends on your department. The best way to find out is to go to your departmental website, search for a doctoral student handbook, and download and read it. Most departments put them online nowdays and it has most of that information there. In my experience graduate students usually take between 2 and 4 courses a semester, with 2-3 courses being the most common. TAships and RAships are usually sources of funding within departments and students either get them competitively (at places that don't award them to everyone) or they get them as a condition of being a PhD student (at places that fund everyone). Some departments require you to do a certain amount of TAing - my psych department requires 5 semesters of TAing, for example. I think all PhD students should have an RAship even if it's an unofficial, 'unpaid' one because research is the purpose of a PhD, but not all are going to TA for various reasons. My first year was 4 courses per semester, working with my advisor as an RA on a project, and reading a lot. That's my major advice for a first-year student, is read a lot in your field becaues that will help you formulate an area of study and narrow your field by finding where the gaps are. Building a relationship with your advisor is important then but also with some other professors in your department. Go to events. Meet people. Talk to your colleagues, talk to your profsesors, go to seminars and stuff...they're all important, you need to get involved in the lifeblood of the department and it's a lot easier to do it when you're a first year taking classes and at the department every day than when you are more advanced and you're not taking classes so you can decide to stay home. We don't take classes year round here, but we are expected to do research year round, although it may be less formally structured during the summer. Also to the last question, very few undergrads take summer classes here and there aren't many offered. So there are few summer TAships. There are opportunities to teach full courses for advanced graduate students (4th year plus) in one of my departments over the summer, and many who are interested in academic careers go for those. Most people here advance their research and work on papers and grants during the summer. In my primary department - which is more applied - it's also normal if not terribly common for students (like me) to get internships to get work experience outside of academia.

Eh, it depends. I went from undergrad to a PhD program in 2008, so I'm in my third year. It's both true and false. I had a bad case of senioritis my last year, but O defeated it by focusing on my research and my senior thesis AND settling for "good enough" on the other classes I was taking once I had made my decisions. You just have to be good enough, especially in non-field classes. But on the other hand, it's better in grad school because you are focused on your area of interest - I loved taking only classes I was interested in. However, I don't necessarily agree that the motivation follows the interest. There will be pleeeeeeeeeeenty of times where you know that you love what you do and once you get started with a specific task, you'll be on a roll and really enjoy it. Yet, you don't begin because...well, whatever you're doing to procrastinate feels good! Lol.

This thread is great. The best parts about a low-income upbringing is that living on a 1500 stipend isn't that much different than any other time in life, and when that 6 figure job drops we'll have the common sense to still live like we do on that 1500 stipend Yep, this. I'm just thrilled with being able to replace things before they run out. The idea of *just my salary* being $60K+? That rocks my world, lol. I'm a first-generation African American student. My father drove the bus in the city for 17 years, and my mom was a stay at home mother. I go to an Ivy League graduate school now, after winning a scholarship to study at a small historically black women's college for undergrad. The hardest thing for me is that I get jealous of the trips my colleagues take - most of them come from middle-class or upper-middle-class backgrounds (I'd call mine borderline working/lower-middle-class, I suppose). So taking trips is just built into their psyche whereas I didn't take any trips we couldn't drive to whem I was younger. They go across continents for their holidays and summer trips and I'm trying to figure out how they pay for this stuff! Unless I'm going to a conference or a wedding, I don't take trips. It leaves me the most bitter of anything else because I always dreamed of traveling as a child, and these are people who have and are going to all the places I've always wanted to visit. Oh well, I guess there's the future... I also have the same issues with trying to explain to family members what I'm doing, why this is hard (they think it's like extended college) and that there is no bounded time frame that they can expect me to be done within. My father was actually unhappy when I decided to do a PhD, and he tried to convince me to quit with my master's when I went home for a visit this summer. Nobody in my family gets the point. OR they think that I'm going to be ridiculously rich with a PhD. They are generally supportive, but my mom recently began pressuring me to get married and have children (I'm turning 25 this year!!!) and my cousin keeps asking me when I'm going to have kids. She's the same age as me and she's got two. I'm not even sure I *want* to have kids, but I think my mom might faint if I tell her that. I was telling my fiance that I feel like I'm in a constant flux/conflict between the university world I inhabit that's got upper-middle-class values and my family's world with the working-class ones.

I have had some really rough points, battled program-related depression and was seriously considering dropping out earlier this semester. Despite all that, though, I do love my program. I love my research; I love the intellectual discussions with the professors and students here. I love my collegial department and how students are treated like junior colleagues here. I love that I chose an interdisciplinary program that allows me to get a really strong basic research foundation but also has a lot of applied and professional elements to it. I love my university's library - omg I LOVE the library. I love the resources and the name recognition of this university and school, and I LOVE the location! The thing is, the two things - the gloom and doom, and the happiness with the program - aren't mutually exclusive. Through personal experience and talking with other grad students, I've found that even at the best programs students go through bouts of unhappiness. It's a stressful lifestyle! You are poor, you will be isolated sometimes, departmental politics will get you down and sometimes you will feel like quitting. But an awesome program (like mine) can save you from that - not necessarily prevent it from happening, but minimize it and help nip it in the bud when it does crop up.

I'm in psychology, although not in clinical. If you don't get in (which I hope you do!) I would recommend staying in the lab another year. Unless the master's degree is at the same school as your desired PhD, usually in psychology you have to start over anyway when you go to a PhD program, so you won't be gaining any time. But if you can continue to do research and get extra skills and maybe a publication, that would strengthen your portfolio without you having to shell out tens of thousands of dollars.

Asking for more time doesn't make you seem uninterested. If you were uninterested, you would turn down the offer. It makes you look like you are carefully considering multiple offers, or waiting for acceptances and funding offers from other schools to make an informed choice. This is something virtually all grad students do. So I would contact the school and ask for an extension so you can make a carefully thought out decision. Do you have something against your undergrad school? How's the research fit with your mentors; what's the placement rate like? If the program is otherwise decent and the only reason you are hesitating is because you went to undergrad there, I would go ahead and go barring any better offers. I've heard the argument both ways (that it matters, and that no one cares) but I've seen plenty of professors with all three degrees from the same place and they seem to do fine. If you have an excellent record of research and publication, I find it hard to believe that a search committee will turn you down solely because you got all of your degrees from the same place.