juilletmercredi

I would not go to an unfunded PhD program. At most private universities, you're looking at tuition of $30-40K per year and living expenses between $20-25K per year. If you only have to fund yourself one year, you're looking at $50-65K, which can be doable if you get full funding your second year and beyond. Most jobs for PhDs will pay around that I suppose, so assuming that you don't have big debt from undergrad that can be manageable. I wouldn't recommend it, though. However, if there's the risk of funding more than 1 year on your own, your costs shoot up to six figures and there's no way to manage that debt - either in academia or in the vast majority of jobs. It doesn't really matter if it moves you towards the PhD and academia - academia doesn't pay well enough in the early years for you to pay off six-figure debt.

I agree with ComeBackZinc. Are you sure that you are underwhelmed because of your relief, or do you really have reservations about Decent School that you are unwilling to entertain because you don't want to consider the possiblity of reapplying next year? As a doctoral student finishing up my third year, I'm going to chime on the recommendation that if you aren't excited about your program you are going to make things so much harder on yourself than they need to be. I *love* my program, my research, my mentors, my colleagues, the libraries, almost everything about this university, but I STILL get my really low days. On those days, remembering everything I love about the program is usually the only thing that keeps me going. You need something to cling to on those days when you're too broke, too tired, too depressed, or too burned out to care and you feel like quitting. (And those days will come.) I'm not 100% of the mind that something is better than nothing. It depends on what that nothing is. If it's a place that you won't be happy, I don't think it's better than nothing, because the PhD process is so stressful that you don't need the added stress of being unhappy in your program in the first place. Then again, I am of the mind that you don't do a PhD just to do one - no, you go to a place that you are excited about to do research you are fascinated with or you don't go at all, in my opinion. The job market is too competitive and the process too grueling to go just for the sake of going. As for the thing going...well, examine your application. What are your strengths? What are your weaknesses? If you had a strong overall application, it may just be the applicant pools have been especially competitive in the last two years. Depending on your field, this may be par for the course - there are a few subfields within my field that people can apply 2-3 cycles before they get admitted anywhere, and then even when they do it may only be 1-3 places they get admitted (and in those subfields it's the norm to apply to 10-15 programs).

Assuming a 45-credit program, that's $50K of debt not including living expenses for UCF, vs. $13K for WSU. Let's say that you borrown $20K for living expenses in Florida per year, but $25K in MA to account for the different living expenses. That's still $90K at UCF but $63K at WSU. For a two year program, I don't think you should go anywhere for location or weather considerations. There is no law saying that you'll have to stay in the Northeast your entire life. You can pursue jobs in the South or other warmer regions later on in life. You don't have to go to school nearby where you want to live - it's ideal if you can, of course, but people move states all the time. Particularly in fields that require licensure, if you can get reciprocal licensure in another state you are usually good to go. And with email and the telephone, you can make contacts anywhere, especially if you go to professional conferences and networking events. I have contacts in many different parts of the country - in fact, most of my contacts are NOT in New York. I also do not agree with the "university culture" argument. That's an undergraduate thing. When you are in grad school, the atmosphere of the university doesn't affect you as much; it's more about the atmosphere of your particular departments and the resources that are available to you.

No, realistically, it will be much more than $60K. If the schook is $32K per year and you only have a $6K scholarship, you're looking at $26K per year or $52K for a two-year program. But you haven't factored in living expenses. If you borrow $25K per year for two years to live on, then you're looking at $102K, plus interest. Even if you scrape by on $20K per year, that's still $92K overall. How will you pay off $92,000? Will your salary look anything like that with a master's in urban planning? I'm guessing no.

Are you waiting because Program 1 did not give you funding and you are curious as to whether Program 2 will give you funding, and plan to switch? If you have no intention of declining Program 1 to go to Program 2 regardless of the decision, then you should just withdraw your application already. What's the point?

You can't just defer the NSF. Deferrals are only granted for military or medical reasons. You can put your fellowship on reserve for up to two years. Acourac, I was on an NIH training grant my first two years (it was an R25, an insitutional grant). IMO, it was a better deal for me than the NSF for my first two years. It did require 20 hours a week of research - which would've gotten done anyway - but it was taxed differently than the NSF so I took home more of it (and the gross was more than the NSF, but that's because my school topped it up). It also came with a pretty deep travel allowance, which with a little planning funded two conference trips a year. I don't think being 'free' for a PI changes your relationship with the PI unless they have some other hang-ups. I didn't get my NSF until my second year, but also it depends on whether you can 'switch' it and take the training grant later. If not, it makes sense to put it in reserve the first two years because then you have 5-6 years of funding, which is what it will take you to finish. I also don't get the logic that it would be more prestigious to begin now. You retain your NSF fellow status regardless of whether your fellowship is in deferral, reserve, or tenure status. You still got the fellowship; it's still just as prestigious. Who cares if random people get it messed up? It's on your CV and the people who need to know about it will know when they see it. I just reviewed the fellow handbook and it doesn't say anything about not being able to put the fellowship on reserve the first year. That's true of the Ford fellowship, though. Awvish, there's no way you can accidentally defer it - it says "Military Deferral" and "Medical Deferral," and "Reserve" looks totally different. (I just looked at it - this thread reminded me to declare tenure for this year!)

The difference between this process and credit scores is that with credit, the rejections are there on a permanent record for people to look at, and generally you aren't competing with anyone else. If you apply for a mortgage at Bank of America and you get turned down, there isn't any other reason besides you. Then Capital One can look at your report and see it. In academia, there's no master record of where you were rejected or accepted (other than your personal blog or something!) and no one can check it next year if you applied to a new batch of schools. And sometimes very qualified applicants are rejected for various reasons that have nothing to do with their qualifications.

Key words: "I never got any official letter in the mail." No matter how enthusiastic a professor is, you aren't formally admitted until you actually get an official letter in the mail (or over email - but it has to be official). This was a misunderstanding on your part: "recommended for admission" means that they submitted your name but you were still subject to final approval from the graduate school. If you emailed the graduate school, they may not have approved you yet and so you were jumping the gun to them. I doubt that they will remember you as an 'arrogant egotistic applicant...' at conferences or anything. I would just let it go and celebrate your decision.

I, personally, don't see the point of getting a PhD unless you love the research. Honestly, it's difficult enough to sustain your interest and your sanity even when you love what you are studying. It's got to be even more difficult when you're not even sure you're interested in that field. I wouldn't choose option 1 or option 2. Don't go to the school if you do not intend to finish your PhD. It's one thing if you were going to give it a game try, and decided after two years that it's not for you. But to go and use the resources and time of your advisor when there is perhaps another student on the waitlist who truly wants a PhD from that program with that advisor...that's a bit unethical to me. The master's exit is not uncommon, but it's usually for people who decide halfway through they want something different, not people who know from jump they dont want to stick around. I would do option 3, with the minor alterations that I would apply to PhD programs AND MS programs. The rejections could be because of weaknesses in your applications (and it wouldn't hurt to ask) but it also could be just a very competitive year and the makeup of the pool wasn't in your favor.

Given the current job market, your academic prospects may be better in political science than writing and rhetoric. Aslso consider the prospect that many departments are kind of puritanical and may not hire you if your PhD is in education and you are studying in the education department. They may want people in an education department. But that's almost besides the point. What do you want to research? What do you want to teach? That's most important. Your 6-8 years in the department will spent doing research in that field, and you'll be expected to continue in that field if you stay in academia. Do you want to do research in political science, or do you want to do research in writing and rhetoric? Do you want to teach poli sci classes as a professor, or do you want to teach writing? Also consider that in a poli sci department you may be expected to develop some kind of literacy in statistics and quantitative methods. Then I would consider the funding. I wouldn't go to Davis (the rhetoric program) simply because they offered you some funding, because if you really want to research and teach in poli sci then that would be a pointless degree. On the other hand, I wouldn't go to a PhD program that didn't offer tuition remission and a stipend of some sort, even if I loved it. You can expect your starting salary as a professor to range from $55K-$70K depending on the area of the country in which you get hired. How are you going to afford to pay back the loans you will have to borrow to attend CGU? Will you be able to get funding in later years (and this is a legitimate question for both universities - what is the chance that you will get funding in your second year and beyond?)

You said $50K after just the first year. But assuming that you are applying for an MFA (which is what it sounds like), don't these degrees normally take 3 years to finish? What are the chances of you getting funding in your 2nd and 3rd years? You have to plan for the eventuality that not only will you have to borrow money for your first year, but that you will have to borrow for those years, too, unless there's a very high chance you will get funded in your second and third year. I also checked the School of the Arts webpage and just the tuition is $50K. That's not including living expenses. I think that a grad student could scrape by comfortably on $25K here in NYC, so you're looking at $75K for your first year, and possibly for your second year, too. The price for the third year is $7-10K, which is much lower, but you still have to borrow living expenses. Anyway, you're looking at $150K for your first two years and $35K for your third year...that's a lot of money, and it's unlikely that an MFA will get you a job that can pay off that kind of debt. For me it would depend on my assurance of getting funding my second year. If close to 100% of the students get some kind of funding their second and third years, then the $75K for the first year *may* be worth it. However, that's higher than even most first-year teaching positions, so honestly, it may not. I've always been of the "follow the money" mindset. I'd go to Riverside.

In my field for a PhD, that's generally the case - no funding means they don't really want you, or at the very least you were at the bottom of their barrel. That is, of course, unless everyone in the department is unfunded as well. $18,000 a year + living expenses (which is likely to be around $25K) is a lot of money for a PhD when there's no funding in sight. Assuming it takes you 5 years to finish, you'll be over $200,000 in debt by the end of the program, with no prospects for making enough money to pay that off. I wouldn't do it. This is assuming that you applied to PhD programs. For MA/MS programs it's often par for the course not to be funded, and the payoff has the potential to be higher, not to mention that your debt load will be lower. It's still roughly $90K over two years, so unless it's a field that yields a high pay-off, I wouldn't do that either.

I agree with the above - be honest, just perhaps leaving out the ranking bit. Most POIs accept the fact that their potentials are applying to more than one place. Just mention the other place was a better research fit and had a better funding offer.

Craigslist, honestly. I know it sounds sketchy but if you can come to the city to visit the places and meet the people advertising the apartments, you can separate the sketch from the true. I found my roommate this year through Craigslist, and a lot of my friends found apartments and/or roommates through Craigslist. Also, if the New School has an office of off-campus housing, inquire there. Columbia has one and that's how I found my apartment AND my roommate last year. We got emails of the other students who were coming in the fall and were also on the waitlist for housing, and she emailed all of the women on the list and I was the first one to respond. Don't email professors, though, as they won't have it. Contact the housing office. Sometimes the departmental secretary gets these advertisements too. Very unlikely to find another apartment on the Upper East Side for that price, heh. I've seen a lot of fake listings on Craigslist, and they seem to favor the Upper East Side with way-too-low prices for studios and sometimes one-bedrooms. It does sometimes happen that there's an incredible deal (a rent-controlled apartment someone inherited and is subletting, or someone has bought an apartment and you're paying half their mortgage, etc.), but usually if it looks too good to be true it probably is. I think it's worth saying that I don't know a single grad student who lives in the UES, or Park Slope, or Tribeca, or any of those traditionally expensive neighborhoods (okay, there is one exception - my psychology post-bac friend who is married to a BCG consultant).

<i>Could suck a lot more, but if you take the stipend and see what you are paid hourly over 9 months it isn't bad. Now, if you can't set personal boundaries and working 40 hours for your stipend it might suck. You also should qualify for subsidized stafford loans which you can always bank and draw upon in times of financial need. If you don't use it you send it back. </i> This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with personal boundaries - I haven't met a doctoral student yet who truly only works 20 hours a week. You usually have to work more if you want to get the kind of experiences that will prepare you and qualify you for a job in academia later, although it varies by program and advisor. However, it is true that if you work it out hourly to 20 hours a week it's actually a pretty good rate - at my school it was $28/hour. Also, when I've filed my taxes the last 2 years (2009 and 2010) that were 100% graduate training, I haven't been eligible for any education credits. That's because I'm not paying my tuition out of my pocket. A tuition waiver doesn't count as out of pocket, and neither does a fellowship that goes directly to the school. (I spoke to tax professionals about this to be sure.) What you get is, like other said, dependent on the resources of your university. That's also going to be dependent on location, though. I am in a PhD program in NYC and our stipends are in the low $30K range (for 12 months) - some of the humanities departments are in the high $20K range (for 12 months; if they are 9 months it's the low-to-mid $20K range). I've seen that as a pattern across most NYC doctoral institutions, although there is one university here that is notorious amongst doctoral students for having really low stipends - sub $20K, although I'm not sure how true that is. That may be the norm in other places, but in NYC you will almost be living on a heating grate at sub $20K before taxes. Or at least you'll have a lot of roommates.

My two cents: I was accepted at Columbia for my PhD and am thinking of going to their graduate housing (at least in the first 1-2 years). Can anyone comment on how good/bad is Columbia graduate housing? It has the huge advantage of being rather cheap (in NYC terms) and very close to the campus. I'm assuming you're on main campus and not the medical center campus. Most of the PhD students I know who are on main campus live in campus housing. The distance is very, very convenient, and for the area of New York that Columbia's housing is in (Upper West Side) it's very affordable on a student stipend. Columbia's stipends are also quite generous, so I know that the students there are comfortable. I've been inside a few and they are very nice - they look like your average apartment, except for New York they are quite nice (most NYC apartments are a lot older) and quite comfortable in size by New York standards. If you are going to be on main campus I recommend looking there first. I go to school on the medical center campus (even though I am in a joint program, officially I belong to the CUMC) and the housing up here sucks. It's very dorm-ish and it's around the same price that you can get your own non-Columbia housing place up here, if not cheaper, with fewer roommates. (I have half a two bedroom apartment for the same amount that I would have to pay to share an apartment 3 ways in Columbia's housing.) So if you're looking at medical center campus housing, start looking elsewhere IMO. I've been looking all over, including Brighton Beach (yes I know it's far from Manhattan but who cares, I'm from Miami and commute a total of 4 hours daily...), Flatbush, etc. Being on the CUMC campus of Columbia I know a LOT of people who commute in from Brooklyn. As long as you are game for the commute (on the subway it ends up being about 1-1.5 hours to Columbia depending on how far into Brooklyn you live, longer at night after the trains run local. If you are going somewhere closer to downtown - to NYU I'd imagine it'd be ideal, maybe 15-45 minutes; to the New School and CUNY somewhere in between). I have a few friends who live in Flatbush and they love it. Would living in Manhattan be doable on this? I'll be looking at renting a room from someone, not getting a whole place to myself. Yes. It won't be high on the hog but you'll be comfortable. For comparison, after taxes I live on about $2100 a month, and I do fine, even sneaking in the occasional dinner out and new pair of shoes. It's pretty tight; I was doing better when my after-tax income was $2300 a month but my funding situation changed recently. Definitely more roommates is preferable - if I don't get the residence life positions I'm applying for, I'll be looking to rent a room in an apartment with more roommates for a lower rent. I've been accepted to Fordham's Rose Hill GSAS program in the Bronx. Some friends and I have been planning to live in Brooklyn for years becasue we know its cheaper than manhattan, but will it be feasible to commute from Brooklyn to the Bronx almost daily via Subway? I'm also considering bringing a bike to make the commute? The medical center campus I attend is about a 20 minute commute to Fordham in the Bronx, and I know a lot of people who commute from Brooklyn to CUMC every day So yeah, it's feasible if you are willing to make the trek. I also have a post-doc in my lab who bikes from Brooklyn to the main campus on 116th St every day. But as someone who lives a 10-minute walk from campus, it's a lot more convenient. Still, almost everyone in NYC commutes somewhere so you won't be alone. It doesn't have to be multiple transfers - if you live on the 4 or the B/D it won't be any transfers, and if you live close to a subway that connects to those trains along the line (almost any train that runs through Brooklyn) it can only be one transfer. But I would also look in Harlem - you can find affordable housing in Harlem and it's a lot closer than Brooklyn. Try Washington Heights and Inwood, too. I live in Wash Heights. I just got into Teachers College, and I'm trying to figure out where I should be looking for apartments. I've pretty much ruled out most of Manhattan (though if there are any affordable areas I don't know about, please enlighten me!), and I can't really tell what'll be moderately affordable with a reasonable commute. Help, please! IMO, Harlem would be the closest commute and affordable. I live in Washington Heights and I can get to Teachers College in 25 minutes door to door (from the time I walk out of my building to the time I'm walking into the building), and it's affordable here too. Inwood would be a bit longer (35-45 minutes depending on where you live) but I know folks who live up there too and it's nice. Also some of the closer areas in Queens might work out, like Astoria and Long Island City. I do know a lot of people who commute up farther than TC from Brooklyn, but you've got to be willing to do it.

Eisenman, big name schools can and do let students go unfunded especially in this economy. My program has a history of funding all students but last year we admitted a student without funding (everyone told her not to come - even professors - because it's not worth it in my field, and she didn't).

First of all, could you combine both fellowships or would you have to choose one? I would check on that before getting your hopes up about both fellowships. My university has it set up so that you can't really receive more than one fellowship at a time, although they will "top up" your funding in certain cases. Second of all, ignore your professor's pressure. If he does it again, I would say "I really, really appreciate your interest, and trust me, I am still interested in University as a top choice. But I would like to have all of my options on the table before I make a decision I can't take back." He's trying to get you to come in because he wants you to work for him, and so it's understandable that he'd want to pressure you, but you have to make such a decision for YOU. He doesn't know that no other school would offer you funding like that and neither do you, so if you are still waiting for Tech and the deadline is nowhere upon you yet (I'm assuming you have until April 15?) I'd wait it out and just deal with him as he comes. Funding is not the only important thing in a program. It is one of THE most important for your quality of life and general happiness, but not THE most important. The culture of the department, the location, the research match between you and your advisor/PI and his or her mentoring style, the requirements of the curriculum - all of that is important and is going to contribute to your time to degree and your satisfaction while you are there. Sometimes it's worth it to take a slightly smaller funding package if the place is going to be better at getting you a job later or you are going to have a happier life doing what you do there.

I recently made a visit to one of the programs I was accepted into and LOVED IT. It is PERFECT. It is a perfect fit: I love the faculty, students, current research, location... even the tiny department building itself. I LOVE IT. I am ready to say, "yes! yes! I do! I do!" And this is a lot coming from someone who does not want to leave NY and has a grad school option to allow her to stay. Tomorrow, I will contact CUNY and let them know that I will not be attending so they can give my funding to someone else. However, I was advised by my partner not to give my perfect program an official acceptance yet because I have not heard back from a few programs. I am 100% sure Harvard and NYU gave me the boot. However, there is still a chance that I might get into Indiana (WL), Amherst, and Johns Hopkins. Indiana and Johns Hopkins do fit with my research interests, not as well as my perfect school, but compatible enough. I am just SO READY to say YES to the perfect school? But should I wait? Am I just high off of my excitement? Wouldn't it be better to remove oneself off the list so others could bump up in the case that there is an unsaid wait-list? I think the only good reason to hold out would be looking at funding offers. If your top-choice is the perfect research match for you, you love the department and you enjoyed your time there and the location is good - I would decline/withdraw right now while it's still early enough in the season. The only reason I wouldn't would be 1) if the funding is less than satisfactory or if 2) you are curious to see whether you would prefer the atmospheres of the other schools. If you are still waiting for Harvard and NYU then you are not 100% sure they rejected you, lol. Would you choose NYU or Harvard over this school? If you say yes to one or either of them I would hold on to them. It seems you are waiting on 5 programs. What I personally would do is decline the programs that are not good research matches for me and/or I know I wouldn't like the location as much as Perfect School. You seemed to indicate that Amherst doesn't really fit well, so I might drop them, for example. I might also drop Indiana because you have been waitlisted there - it's not like you are waiting on an actual decision, so better to bump someone else up on the waitlist assuming there is someone beneath you. I would be left with NYU (which I would retain), Harvard (which I might retain) and Johns Hopkins (which would be a toss-up depending on how close the research match is and depending on how much I was interested in living in Baltimore compared to my other choice).

I will say this: I regret not taking 1-2 years off and teaching abroad before this program. It was one of my dreams and I gave it up because I got into a prestigious program that doesn't allow deferrals. I really, really wish I had. So if this is something you want to do, I say that you do it, because it's a lot harder to do it once you've got the PhD (or in the middle of the program). I would hate for this to sound callous but...you have to do what's best for you, honestly. The program has a choice about whether they want to fill your spot with someone else for this year and then leave a spot open for you for next year, or not to. I think everyone applying to grad school has a responsibility to come up with a Plan B, because there's always the chance you won't get in. I also don't see how OP's deferral is going to cost someone else a spot? In any case, OP really wants to go badly too, and I don't know why one person's desire should be weighted over the other's.

1. I don't see how a newer program would necessarily offer more career growth opportunities. More established programs are usually considered a known quantity in academia, and generally have the better options. 2. Settling somewhere long-term should not be a consideration if you are planning on a PhD program and going into academia. Chances are your job offer will be somewhere else anyway, and you will have to move. Don't get too attached to any one location if you want to be a professor, especially if you are in one of the humanities. It honestly doesn't matter if you go to a program in Boston, unless you are miserable there. That doesn't mean you will ever get a job there (and Boston being Boston, you probably won't. The competition for those professor positions in Boston is going to be fierce). If you are planning to take your PhD into industry then that might be more of a consideration, but if the program is a reasonably well-known one in your field then again, it doesn't matter where you go location-wise. But to answer the actual question, fit is more important than prestige. You need to fit there research-wise and not be miserable (because if you are miserable you will not want to do work). In a lot of fields and within academia in general, who you work with is also more important than the general prestige of the university or the department. If you are working with someone famous in your area at a middling department, that can sometimes be better than going to a famous department and working with an unknown. I'd also argue that to a certain extent, happiness is more important than prestige. I'm not saying that you should rule out areas because that's not where you want to be right now. I'm saying that if you know you'd be miserable in a certain type of environment, then to me getting a PhD is not worth the 5 years of misery (or more). If the best program in the country is on a farm in a rural area but #3 is in a city I'd go for number 3, personally. But if you know that you would be reasonably content in a specific place I wouldn't rule it out.

As for telling graduate students, I'd share if they ask. The grad students are not going to hold it against you since we've just been through the same process, and we might have some intelligence on the other programs via friends or colleagues we know there When I told other grad students about my other offers, they said things like "Those are good schools, you should consider them" and how to choose between packages and stuff. Here, when we ask prospectives about the funding they've gotten, we're not asking out of jealousy or competition. We're asking to better advise students who want to come. For example, a recent prospective visited and then told us that she wasn't offered *any* funding, and the overwhelming response was that she shouldn't come at all if she didn't have any money (she didn't). This program is far too expensive and the payoff is not good enough. I never mind telling other prospectives and grad students exactly how much I make and how easy/difficult it is to live on here. I think that information is vital for your quality of life. And my fellow students and I kvetch about our salaries all the time when we get together for social events, lol.

I'm in a psychology PhD program (not clinical) and although I didn't go through the process myself I've seen it from the other side. For our all-day interviews, you generally formally interview with 1-3 professors but you also will have more informal events chatting with graduate students; your potential lab may take you out to dinner, and we take our prospectives out to lunch. You may also have a departmental information session to attend. There may be a lot of walking. So my suggestion is to wear something that is both sort of dressy and casual. In my department a suit would be a *little* too dressy - we have interviewees who wear suits every year, but generally people wear slacks or a nice skirt and a sweater (I'm in NYC, so it's cold in February) or button-down. And some nice but comfortable shoes - flats or loafers are fine. Whether or not it's okay to bring someone depends on accommodations...if you will be staying with a grad student (like we do here) then it's probably not appropriate unless he's getting a separate hotel room or has other friends to stay with in the area. If they are putting you up in a hotel, there shouldn't be any extra charge for an additional person but they may be doubling you up with another prospective, so I would check first. (Maybe email a grad student coordinator? In my department, the grad students coordinate all those things.) Regardless I would not bring a significant other to the interview/activities; we want to see how you operate without him around because that's what it'll be like when you're in the trenches with us. Besides it looks unprofessional. And even if he does come, I would not skip on "optional" activities like social events with grad students afterwards or dinner. Insider tips? This is going to sound ominous but in my program for interview weekend, we are always observing you. Here in my department we spend substantial amounts of time together - people spend hours per week in the labs (it varies by lab) and in the department, taking classes, seminars, and we're also pretty social. We want people who are going to really mesh with us, not just research-wise but personality wise. Not to mention that our faculty are lovely and they solicit our opinions about incoming grad students. So remember that you are "on" even when you are at lunch, dinner, or the informal chats. I don't mean we're going to eject you if you drop pasta down your shirt, lol, I just mean remain professional (but relaxed; be yourself) throughout the day.

I get this double, since I'm in a public health and psychology interdiscplinary program. I don't even bother telling people the real name (sociomedical sciences) because no one knows what that is. Them: What are you getting your PhD in? Me: It's in psychology. A: Are you psychoanalyzing me right now/watch out, she's going to psychoanalyze you! B: So you want to get inside crazy people's minds? C: So you want to to be a therapist, then? D: So do you get to play with rats all day? (On the rare occasion someone realizes there are research psychologists as well as therapists, I get this question. I don't use animal models in my research, but even if I did...playing with rats?) And then I have to explain that it's a research degree blah blah blah. Now when I answer public health: A: Is that like medical school? B: So you are like trying to find the cure for cancer or something? C: (Once they find out I do HIV research) So you are like trying to find the cure for AIDS, then? And then there's the universal question..."So what are you going to do with that?" My younger sister is so confused by what I do I've given up trying to explain it to her, and when people ask her she just tells them I'm trying to find a cure for AIDS. At this point I don't even care anymore, it's close enough. Lol!