Milo_10011

Simplest way around this: 1. Go to the bar. 2. Order a Coke. 3. The only people who will care are ... actually, no one will care.

I know that a teacher cannot discuss a student's grades, even with a parent. However, that's kind of the whole mentality I'm thinking about. I question whether a "Tiger Mom"-raised child would be ALLOWED to refuse to sign away his or her rights to grade privacy, hence my wondering about whether parents inserting themselves into the teacher-student dynamic is something that goes on at the college level.

So, I read that the daughter of "Tiger Mom," the Yale professor who wrote that WSJ editorial about how to raise successful children, has just been accepted into Harvard. My question for those grads who are teaching in some capacity: Do such parents "involve" themselves in their children's college educations? That is, do you get e-mails or phone calls challenging you on every grade? Or is this woman such an outlier that she is unique? How do you/would you deal with such a parent if he or she inserted themselves into your interactions with the student?

My take on these courses is that there is a market for them. Some people simply need the kind of coaching provided. However. (You knew that was coming.) And I don't mean to be mean. How good of a student is someone going to be in grad school if they couldn't figure out how to pass the GRE on their own? I realize the GRE measures, basically, your ability to take the GRE, but the test's other significant utility is that it's merely a research problem. "How do I get the best score I can on this?" You SHOULD be able to do well on your own, assuming you have enough time to prepare and don't get panicky about standardized tests (if you do tend to panic, then maybe the program's worth it for just that reason). As I recall, the ads for these place go something like this: Sylvia Student took a sample GRE and got 640. Then she took OUR course and took another sample GRE, and this time, she got 720. How much of that increase would have occurred ANYWAY as Sylvia took test after test on her own? One error I see a lot of people do in these things is to take a lot of practice tests under timed conditions. BIG mistake. First, taking a lot of full tests is time-consuming and can burn you out. Remember learning to drive? Did they take you out onto the highway during a blizzard? "Okay kiddo. It's your first lesson. Drive with your knee while you peel back the lid on your coffee and watch out for that semi that's about to cross the divider and kill us all." No. You learner dumb-ass things. Check the rear-view mirror. Never give a cop the middle finger. Start slow, build from there. If you're already doing a 95% success rate on one type of problem, you can only gain a 5% improvement. Pfft. Everyone wants a perfect score. You're not going to do that (unless you are very smart, very lucky or both). There's no bonus for getting one section completely right. This isn't a video game. Also, because you don't see any significant improvement while testing the stuff you're already good at, you can tend to stagnate and despair. (Oh, darn, I'm still missing two or three on these logic problems. I've studied for weeks, and I'm only up to 97% on these. I'm never going to get the hang of the rest of this. I'm so stupid.) Take the first test under timed conditions. Fine. Now you have a benchmark. Take the second test section by section over several days. Work each problem to the utmost of your ability (note when you start and end each question). Grade the second test. How does it compare, section by section, to the first test? If you did crappy in one section for BOTH tests, you have just identified what you have to focus on. If you did crappy on the first test in one section but much better in the same section on the second test, all you need to do is work on your speed. Speed almost always will improve by drilling, so that should be easy.

I have a bit of an unusual academic path. Did very badly my first undergraduate year (I failed several science courses.) Got kicked out for the grades. Got back in. Did much, much better in a non-science major (including one semester with a 4.0). Final GPA, 2.7. If I cut away the first year, I probably managed around a 3.2. (I've never gotten around to doing the math.) Went to grad school. (Yes, I already have a master's.) Got a 3.25. Lived my life. Took some additional coursework, did well in the non-science stuff, made some recoveries in some of the sciences (I took the chem final, 15 years after getting a 12 on the chem final as a freshman and started laughing at the end of the exam because I was the first one done. I got two things wrong on the entire exam.) Now, going back to school, this time for PoliSci. The school's undergrad GPA "cut-off" is 3.0. Obviously, I don't have that. So I made an appointment, sat down with an adviser with my transcripts and said, basically, "Here are my grades. They aren't perfect. But when you take into account my lousy first year, my improvements afterward, and that I've done graduate school already, I think there's at least a somewhat reasonable argument that the 3.0 undergrad GPA should have a little wiggle room. What I'd like to know is, if I apply, do I have a reasonable chance of getting admitted, or should I simply not bother? Because I don't mind being told 'No.' But I'd much rather be told right now that there's simply no way I'll get in with these grades. There's no point in wasting the committee's time or my own in a pointless endeavor." I was told that I should apply, that I certainly wouldn't be automatically rejected. Has anyone else gotten around the undergrad GPA minimum? Or have any stats or information on that sort of thing? I don't think the adviser would lie to my face. He certainly could have said something more vague, like, "Well, we really can't comment on that because we have to exam you in comparison to all the other students, blah blah blah." But I'd really like to get the, um, community's feel on this.

So, I've given my letter of recommendation forms to my two references. That would be about two weeks ago. The deadline is May 1. How long do I wait before "reminding" them? The 15th? The 21st? Today?

No one -- okay, maybe nine people ever since grad school began -- has ever written something along the idea of an SOP, LOI or any other TLA associated with grad school that was so compelling that it couldn't be put down. No matter how strongly you burn with the need to go to University A and study Subject B under Professor C, no matter how long you've know this, the committee has seen it before. A lot of people think they are great writers. And a lot of them are wrong. If you're given X number of pages, you're given X number of pages. If I were on the committee and I had a pile of 50 applicants, 49 of which had adhered to the page limit, I would have one overriding thought when I picked up that one over-the-limit essay: This had better be good. And by good, I mean the best of the entire bundle because otherwise I see no reason for why you felt the rules didn't apply to you, and it inclines me to think that you are going to do the same sort of thing with research, classes, and deadlines. Yes, it's a university. It's also a business. Everyone can't be a free spirit, marching to the beat of their own drum, man.

I took some courses at Rutgers. Housing for one will be difficult. Most of the housing I was aware of was in house-shares. Consider a Craigslist ad to help weed out the stoners and the deadbeats who'll eat all your food on you. Speaking of food, consider the meal plan at Rutgers. Food, prep, cleanup, shopping can eat hours from a schedule. It may not be glamorous, but dining hall food can at least allow you to stabilize your eating so you aren't falling into the whole ramen and pasta lifestyle. And if you have the kind of schedule where you have a big fat single hour between two classes, you'll find that dining commons is a pretty good place to use the hour getting yourself fed. Transportation? I think bringing a car to campus or commuting with a car is a ridiculous waste of time and money. I commuted and the traffic is bad, and parking can be really hard sometimes. Why introduce aggravation? And insurance in New Jersey is not cheap. And gas is going up all the time. You don't want to be in a spot where you end up paying $10 more a week for gas. Then $15. Then $20 ... Night life is pretty good. Lots of bars, lots of restaurants (some great, some not-so). Chain restaurants too. NYC is an hour away by commuter rail (and that's a walk from campus). Hope this helps.

I still remember just sort of laughing it off. "Oh, a statement of purpose. That should take about half an hour."

None. I'm still way back at the M.A. part of the whole thing. But I don't want to get accepted to an M.A. program and then blissfully go along under a delusion for the entire time only to get the surprise of my life two years later.

From some of the posts, I'm getting a sense that there are some Ph.D. students out there who must be living on heating grates. My understanding was that a PhD student gets a stipend, tuition waiver, housing allowance, and medical/dental/vision insurance. But some of the posts I'm coming across have me thinking this is not the case. Can a few of the Ph.D.s tell me what the "norm" is?

siue16171617 makes excellent points. My situation, as an unemployed person, is that I pretty much have no choice but to go to grad school. My first career is over. I've been considering grad school off and on for several years, and I now basically have nothing preventing me from going. In addition to a new career path, it will give me an opportunity to wait out the economy. So I'm willing to take on debt for an MA. But certainly not the amounts being discussed on the board. $80k for an MA? I think my cutoff point would have to be $20k for a two-year program. Perhaps $25k.

And for those keeping score ... I dropped off my SOP today. Eighteenth draft. Simply couldn't take the stress any more. I think they should let me in solely on effort.

My recollection was that the schools, pretty much, get to see whatever they want to. You have the choice to invalid the test before you leave the testing center -- and back in the paper days you had several days to think it over -- but that's the extent of your control. Otherwise, people would, literally, take the test a dozen times until they finally hit their stride and scored fantastically. I'm sure the GRE people would be happy with that, but probably not the universities.

Just wondering what reasons people have for going to grad school. In my case, it's something I've been gnawing on for about five years. Now that I'm unemployed, it just seems like a sensible time to either do it or drop it. I would be interested in other people's reasons.

ALRIGHT! Now THAT'S what I'm talking about! Thanks, everyone. Those were some excellent pieces of advice. If anyone has more to add, I'll be delighted to read it.

So I'm applying for the MA polisci program at the nearby college. Assuming I get in, I want to go for a PhD somewhere else. My big question is "How do I position myself for the best shot at a really good PhD program?" So far, I've run into a lot of non-statements like, "Really work hard. Get to know the professors. Hand in all your assignments on time. Do well on the tests." I don't want to sound like a jerk, but, duh, if I can't get do well on the MA-level tests, it really doesn't bode well for my situation as a PhD student. That, I can figure out on my own. Does anyone have something a little more precise? For instance, the MA program is a two-year program. Should I be planning for publication submission? How long do I wait before I start in on that? Should extracurricular activities be related to polisci, or non-related to show that I'm not a fanatic who's hopelessly blinkered. I realize that everyone's path is different, but perhaps a couple of examples of appropriate paths for others will help me figure out what would be right for me. Thanks for any help.

Yes. I sent a version to a couple of friends. Each had different bits of advice. I can't find anything on the school site. I think I actually did finally get the right mindset though. I just finished the 11th draft, but I like this one. The others always had me reading it and saying, "No. No. That's not what I really mean."

I am now up to draft 10 of my statement of purpose. I keep thinking this is what it must be like to go insane. I haven't -- YET -- started going around, touching all the corners three times to keep the world from ending, but this is getting ridiculous. I have never needed to write anything more than three or four times in my life, and even in those rare cases, each iteration was a refinement of the previous version. I keep going back and tearing down and starting over. I don't seem to be approaching the end, I just seem to be going in a circle. Anyone have any advice?

I realize the question is pretty overbroad, but could I get some recommendations (either a re-direct to another site or just a brief list) for what the generally accepted standard texts in political science are?

No one is as old as me. As old as I? Me. No, I, I me, oh, me don't know.

I'm an older student (39 years old) trying for an MA (then a PhD). I need two letters of recommendation. Regrettably, most of the professors who knew me well enough to be able to write a recommendation were from my undergraduate days in journalism school. Undergraduate is something like 20 years ago and in a different field. I have gone back to school intermittently for the past few years (some courses here, some courses there, mainly just to keep my brain from going soft). Two of my most recent teachers were graduate students/doctoral students in history courses. I did very well in those courses. Here's the questions I'm mulling: 1. Is a letter from an associate professor who was teaching a history course "good enough"? Most of the courses I took were of the 300 students crammed in an auditorium variety, so there wasn't a lot of opportunity to make an impression. 2. Because of my age, is using a professional evaluation from a former employer (who also now teaches at WashU) better (or equivalent)? 3. Mix and match? One teacher and one former boss? Thanks.