switch

I want that five minutes of my life back.

I am thinking about the graduate students who went to programs that were far too advanced for them or they were far too advanced for. Do you know anyone like this? Did they adapt? Fail? Transfer? Give up? Did the professors like them? Hate them? Ignore them? What about the students in the same cohort? it's harder for me to imagine poor students who ended up in great programs than it is to imagine great students who ended up in terrible programs. But I'm sure it happens to someone, somewhere................

I am past the Craigslist Furniture stage of my life so I've already invested in real furniture and real art. I can't just throw out a $2000 sofa and a $1000 painting.

No. It's NOT excellent advice. Universities talk all the time about "fit." Ignore the "fit" talk at your own peril. It's immature to say that all universities are the same and just differentiated by their price tags.

I've been in about four graduate programs so far, and I left undergrad about 15 years ago. University culture is very real. I would hate to go to a highly religious, conservative program. Look at what happened to the conservative student who refused to deal with gays as counselling patients and she got kicked out of her graduate counselling program. Some programs use a lot of collaborative groups; others are competitive. Some groups emphasize professional ethics; others are very international. It's ridiculous to assume all the programs are exactly the same and you can make regional schools like "Mercy College" or "Wayne State" relevant in states that have never heard of these universities.

Try to find a micro-apartment like this............ http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/cozy_crazy_couple_makes_tight_studio_R15ToNFTaJE3c17zkw4efP

I had to move a really long distance once in the last five years, and the idea of making a second really long distance move to a different part of the country is seriously depressing me. 1. I hate packing and unpacking boxes. 2. The last move some fragile furniture and art got broken beyond repair. 3. I had to drive for 3 days to transport my car. WITH my dog in the back seat. UHHHHHHHHHHHHH........................... Do you know what it's like driving cross country during July and August??????? 4. I was completely lost in my new city for weeks. 5. It was expensive and now I get to repeat the expense a second time. Is anything positive about moving? Any horror stories? Any inspiring stories? Thanks...............

I have already published some papers and presented papers at conferences. But as an older student, the graduate admissions committees act like it doesn't matter.

Not to be Debbie Downer........ Remembering my information is anecdotal.............. I have visited a lot of medical admissions websites for non-trad students, and the stories of massive rejections and shut-outs of older applicants is PRETTY AMAZING. I heard of one older (50s) applicant getting 45 rejections. The ONE med school that accepted him was the one he had previously been a consultant or a dean or an engineer or someone with decent rank. I read about an older (50s) woman in Canada going to medical school. Turns out her husband was a massive donor to the university. Go figure. Medical schools seem to brutally discriminate on the basis of age..............

For as bad as the admissions process is 0/7 or 1/8, at least you have something to hope for......... Much of the job market is tedious, stultifying, fraudulent, pressured.......... People are lucky if they have all of these problems and they are getting paid a lot............. At least you are getting started on a career you will enjoy. The more time you waste in dead-end jobs, the higher your opportunity costs. One way I made my last grad school a great experience was to find a gorgeous apartment. A terrific apartment can improve the whole experience. (Money helps).

It's a PhD. But at least I'd move towards the PhD degree which is the entry level degree to get into academia. My future as a Walmart greeter seems bleak and short.........And not a lot of jobs are hiring........... Even nursing or computers would require more education and training............................. Unpaid education and training...... Who else is really hiring?

If an applicant with Ivy degree, multiple publications, work experience gets rejected by a lot of schools and an applicant with none of those things gets accepted by a lot of programs, how much does the mere acceptance or rejection reconstruct their market value? For example, every time you apply for credit and get turned down, it hurts your overall credit score. Is reputational harm from grad rejections aking to that? Better not to apply at all, than to apply and be rejected? Or is the applicant not harmed by a lot of rejections?

I would vote for the university with the educational and local culture that will sustain you best. If one program is much better than the other. If one program emphasizes group work versus exams. If one is very conservative, religious, etc, and you're also conservative, religious or not. And also think about whether you will stay that after getting your degree, because a lot of alum networking is regional.

bump

YOu might want to switch to medicine and nursing. Those are the only jobs that are hiring right now.

They are probably averse to risks in this economy, and they don't have to take risks due to the large number of applicants. Unless your undergrad is horrible for some reason (location, politics, educational quality) you should probably take the offer.

It's in bad form to say that age makes a difference in admissions but I am almost positive advanced ages--late 30s, 40s, 50s--definitely hurt applicants at the most competitive schools. I almost never see non-trad students at the Harvard, Yale, MIT, Stanford graduate PhD programs, and I've seen some connection in my own application process. I've had some admissions reps pay lip service to "experience," "professional knowledge," etc. but the top programs value research skills by very young precocious minds. At least, that's my two cents............... based on what I have read and observed.......................

Did the number of grad applications rise this year due to the recession? If I reapply when the economy has improved will my chances of admission improve? I have two unfunded acceptances so should I roll the dice on a reapplication or just bite the unfunded bullet?

bump

You know how some people cannot afford to buy a Mercedes so they buy a Ford instead? Think grad programs. Just because I want to drive a Mercedes doesn't mean I'm going to. It's this blindness to economic realities that makes me want to avoid English professors. My question stands: which path is more likely to be survivable and intellectually fulfilling? As I said, I'd rather teach public policy, but if I wouldn't survive the PhD without funding then I'm better off staying in the English program than taking a job I like even less.

I have two offers from schools ranked about 50 and 75 in public policy PhD programs. Both of those offers are unfunded. I have become more and more interested in public policy issues, so I am drawn to these programs. But I recognize that unfunded doctoral students are exploited labor. It's not certain I would pick up funding even in my second or third years but I can try to get a part-time job. I am also accepted to a school ranked about 60 in English PhDs programs. This offer is funded. I did a M.A. in English already and taught college composition for a few years. The funding is tuition reimbursement plus 17k annually probably for 4 years. The problem is that I would really like to jump to a public policy PhD program, think that overall job market is stronger than English, but recognize that the funded offer is a strong signal to employers. Which option is stronger? The stronger signal of a funded position in the weaker market--English--or the weaker signal of the unfunded offer in the stronger market--public policy?? I am still waiting to hear from a few more programs and am waitlisted at one, but this may be what I have to go with.