Armadilla

I was always very frustrated with classes where I got the equality is treating non native speakers as native speakers treatment. You know some of these studens have been learning this language for a couple of years and they might be putting endless hours in trying to study both content/ language at the same time. Fairness is not to throw their efforts away because they are not native writers. In my opinion you should grade everyone equally at the end of the day but give some chance for non native speakers to improve and develop a system where people (everyone) can get a decent grade if they excell on the non strictly language aspect of the course.

Establish a firm rubric ahead of time for ALL students that incorporates expectations for grammar/syntax. If you offer the opportunity for one graded draft, then do it for everyone. There is absolutely no reason to expect less from a non-native English speaker if they know what the expectations are well in advance. The responsibility is theirs to make sure that the writing meets the standards you've laid out in the rubric. You should also be aware of the assistance that is available on your campus with regards to academic writing for all students (another poster mentioned the Writing Center - your school likely has one) and actively encourage all students to use that resource. Also, as an aside, I'm kind of bothered by your phrase "write with an accent" which really isn't culturally sensitive. People don't "write with accents." I hope that isn't a phrase you're going to use with your students!

Many (most?) schools have a writing center. These students should already be aware that they are non-fluent, and therefore might resonably be expected to have to work harder to produce satisfactory work. If they cannot handle the classwork, perhps they need to be in easier classes. Different standards are not acceptable in the same class. I went to college with a weak math background, as that was not something students in my small high school were very interested in (most stopped math after algebra 2). I didn't expect or receive easier grading than my better-prepared classmates. Why should it be any different in this case? I have also had the experience of living and going to school in a country where I did not speak the language -- I know it's hard, but there, again, no accomodations were made (and my grades were pretty pathetic -- except for math, where I actually managed to hold my own).

I appreciate the aim of your post. However, I cannot agree with you.

I will reiterate that I respect those establishments that recognize my potential/worth from the beginning and want a chance to cultivate it. What I don't appreciate are people and institutions who come along afterwards--after they have rejected me yet after someone else has given me a chance through which I have blossomed--to say that I have now earned their respect and a place in their program; it's arrogant, and I have loyalty to the people and institutions who initially see my potential and give me a chance versus those that don't and only want me after I have proven myself in spite of them because of the faith and belief of others. For me, it's a question of character rather than prestige.

Thus, I am not an ambitious grad student who is going to take any and all opportunuties to suckle at the hegemonic power teet and do any and everything I can to get into the most prestigious program possible; clearly, I have a different set of criteria for the kind of program that I want to be a part of. Because, sometimes, the "best" program is not always what is "best" or appropriate for a particular student, which is why it really is (or should be) all about fit.

However, by all means, have at it. I appreciate your "concern" but being who I am is precisely why one of those top programs--and all of the [what I consider] sycophantic pandering that goes along with it--are just not for me. I will always be a candidate who understands that programs need us just as much as we need them, that a healthy relationship is one of mutual respect, rather than one in which students should be humbly grateful and deferential for being even the slightest acknowledgement; really, do I sound like someone who is ever deferential?

As someone who has a very great love for Berkeley, look at the hiring history. You're better off at Stanford. Unless a 40 minute public transport ride to SF is what it takes to make you feel like: OMG I TOTALLY LIVED UP MY GRADUATE YEARS BY GOING TO SAN FRANCISCO AND SEEING OFF-BROADWAY SHOWS AND GOING TO NON SLUTTY INTERESTING LOUNGES AND SEEING ART AND THE MOMA AND ALSO NOT HAVING ANY FUNDING BUT IM A BOSS AND I LOVE MYSELF, and that makes you happy, then go for it. Michigan is still a top department in our discipline; do you think people go to Ann Arbor to have fun? They to go to train to be anthropologists. If location/distractions matter that much for you that you can't sacrifice that much for the discipline now, what makes you think that you'll take the only job offer you get as an untenured professor at Boise State after a phd in anthro? Yes it fucking sucks ass, but that's the harsh shitty reality of higher education now. Either take it, or continue to use it as a placebo against schools you weren't competitive at. Your choice, academe couldn't care less.

Learn to play the accordion.
Invent your own language.
Beat the world record at Minesweeper.
Try to kiss your elbow.
Get involved in a local Star Trek live action role play group.
Make Lazy College Senior memes (or live them).
Sew a quilt.

I'll come back later with some more serious ones.

4. You're so smart, of course you'll get in!
3. You'll get in because everyone knows the average American is an uneducated redneck, so there'll be no competition (hurrah for feel-good foreigner philosophy)
2. What's your Plan B?

And my personal favorite...

1. You know you can always teach highschool when you finish your English PhD.

Yup. I'm disturbed. Thank you for this thread.

anyone got email from U of Chicago? I got an email from professor and wanted to talk to me via Skype. I never expected an interview from Chicago, but very nervous indeed.

I went to a pretty average college myself and I go to Columbia now. I think your academic record and other experiences matter far more than the actual where.

Nope, wasn't me. I know that this is/has been a really hard time for everyone and that waiting is the hardest part of this whole process. But I'm beginning to see that we shouldn't write off any schools until we hear back from them officially. I think that a number of schools don't have a formal interview process but will interview a candidate that they're interested in, but want to know more about (maybe there's something inconsistent about their application or there's a hole in it or they just want to see if the person really is all that). Either way, I know that Brown hasn't interviewed all candidates. Unfortunately, we're just going to have to sit tight for the next two-three weeks and hope that these various committees make their decisions nice and early.

You're necrotic? You should really see a doctor about that. Or a coroner.

As for your chances: it's all about research fit, less about the stats.

Though I don't know the new GRE scale well, the above posters are likely correct concerning your Q score. This is especially true given your interests. If you want to do IPE/finance, you need to demonstrate aptitude in math. Did you take a methods sequence in undergrad? Any math courses? Stats?

If you apply to study a methods-heavy subfield with a low Q score, you need to prove you can hack it in a methods sequence. My perception is that you can get in with a low GRE if you have either great pedigree or extensive training in math-centric courses (and did well in those courses). If Kosuke Imai says you're ready for grad school, many (most?) adcoms will overlook a low Q. They will view strong performance in a rigorous econometrics sequence similarly.

It sounds like you're in good shape if this season goes poorly. Should you receive less than favorable decisions, you can wait it out a year while doing a Fulbright (which is a great opportunity - congratulations). If that case actualizes, I suggest you apply to different schools.

First, you may want to consider schools in the 10-20 range. Your present list is essentially the top 10 plus one safety. There are many excellent schools that have a lower overall ranking but that nonetheless would be better fits for your interests. If I were you, I'd look into Wisconsin, OSU, and Illinois. Though ranked somewhat lower, Emory might be a good fit for you.

Second, I suggest you remove some of the schools on your list. Who would you work with at Berkeley? For all practical intents, they don't have an IR program. Yale? Scheve is fantastic but that's about it for IPE. Plus, he doesn't really do finance. With your interests, I'd rather be at Wisconsin than Berkeley.

Third, I'd diversify. In my opinion, applying to a large set of peer schools adds little utility. The top schools generally admit the same group of people. If you're rejected at Columbia, Princeton, and UCSD, you're probably not going to get in at Yale, Michigan, Stanford, or Harvard. I haven't met anyone that was accepted to one school in the top 10 and rejected by 8 others. Thus, my advice is to apply to a few schools from the very top, a few schools from just below that, then a few below that, etc., until you are applying to schools at which you have a high probability of acceptance. At present, there's only one such school on your list.

Here's an example list:

Harvard
Princeton
UMich
UCSD
UCLA
Wisconsin
OSU
Illinois
Emory
Washington
TA&M

Don't use that list as I haven't seen your application. The list is intended to be an example. You very well may receive an acceptance from a top school. A list like the one above preserves that possiblity without seriously diminishing its likelihood. However, it also improves your set of potential outcomes conditional on rejection at top schools.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions. I attend one of the schools to which you're applying and have similar interests.

Best of luck!

Had some good news today, got recommended for a Fulbright by the IIE

publishing honors thesis in graduate/undergraduate journal

Were you that guy on the cover of Forbes magazine last month?

Were you that guy on the cover of Forbes magazine last month?

All the things you love, Austin is known for. Sounds like a perfect fit! There are too many live music venues to name in one post, but you'll find no shortage of country, alt-country, and folk music in Austin. One of my favorite low-key places for that kind of stuff when I lived there was The Saxon Pub. But like I said, Austin is well-known for good music and boasts a variety of clubs and musical styles. I would, however, advise you *not* to visit Sixth Street. Though it's historically famous, it's about the least interesting place to go in the whole city unless you like college bars with bad music and cheap, lousy well drinks. For an interesting bar scene, you might visit Rainey Street, south of downtown instead. Lots of little houses converted into theme bars. As for sports and outdoors stuff, again the city is known for both. My favorite outdoorsy area was the Barton Creek Greenbelt...great for biking, hiking, and rock climbing and pretty close to the heart of the city. The Hill Country features lots of outdoorsy places though...far too many for one visit.

My final two cents (and this goes for all the people with any concerns about going to UT) is that Austin is flatly one of the best cities in the United States. Everyone I know who used to live there wants to move back. Everyone I know who has visited, loved their time there and were amazed at such a hip city in the heart of Texas (though Texas as a whole is far more interesting than people give it credit for!). Whenever I tell people I did my undergrad at UT-Austin, 99% of the time the next words out of their mouths are "Austin is a great city!" And for those of you who are worried about living in a city in Texas, ease your minds. Austin is about the weirdest, easy-goingest, most heterogeneous, and most interesting city you'll find. Great food, great music, beautiful weather 75% of the year, and a really good university to boot! For those of you who choose UT, you'll have a fantastic experience in Austin, no doubt about it.

I found a US coin (I'm not in the US). I consider it good luck.

Yes it has happened to me a lot. It doesn't mean anything, last year I saw LSE bumper stickers, T-Shirts etc, all over the place, I still never found the funding to go. Also, once I was flirting with this guy, and I used to see his name everywhere, on hoardings, in the news papers, in movies, we didn't end up going out.
I think since these places are in the forefront of your mind you're just picking them out of your environment more often than you normally would.

New leaf- Actually being from one school won't be the deciding factor. The applicant is the deciding factor and if the nyu student was lazy for four years they would not get in over the person from Boise State who work hard for four years. For undergrad it doesn't matter the university it's what you did. This is coming from a person who went to the small university for undergrad and is now in the middle of the top program in m field for my phd.

Wow just want to say how arrogant people on this have become and to say in my field I have yet to meet someone at conferences or in my school or and very little have been written in a journal from nyu. Just saying school focus on very specific things and honesty you know how many recs they are writing both from students from their university and everyone they have encounter at field schools and etc. The more so called famous someone is the more recs they write. Not to mention everyone has enemies. And everyone have programs who will reject you because they hate one of your recs. Professors love some professors and hate some just like everyone does.

Well, if you are into feminist anthropology and effect of bipolar drugs on the brain cognition or something, then Dr. Martin's letter can get into a program where there is FIT, i.e., a professor who studies similar issues and actually sees some potential in you. If she just barely knows you, I doubt that a letter of rec might make that big of a difference. However, if she REALLY knows you and is willing to support your candidacy and even go out of her way and give whoever a call, then you definitely have that competitive advantage that other people do not have. The irony is, you can have all these perks without going to NYU--you just have to work hard, go out of your way and do interesting research projects on the national or international level.

First check around online to see if there's an online status page. Most programs will have one, although they aren't always updated frequently. If you submitted your scores more than two weeks ago and they don't appear, then you'd be better off calling and asking.

Isn't Chinese New Year coming up? And then there's Valentine's Day . . .

Well, if you are into feminist anthropology and effect of bipolar drugs on the brain cognition or something, then Dr. Martin's letter can get into a program where there is FIT, i.e., a professor who studies similar issues and actually sees some potential in you. If she just barely knows you, I doubt that a letter of rec might make that big of a difference. However, if she REALLY knows you and is willing to support your candidacy and even go out of her way and give whoever a call, then you definitely have that competitive advantage that other people do not have. The irony is, you can have all these perks without going to NYU--you just have to work hard, go out of your way and do interesting research projects on the national or international level.