long_time_lurker

Why? If someone can take advantage of a market inefficiency, that makes him a good consumer.

When the grocery store has a sale on 2 lbs. of sugar for $1, you would seriously argue that I ethically should buy the 6 lb. package for $3.99 instead of 3 2 lb. packages for $3, just in case some guy who only needs 2 lbs. can buy his for $1? Would you also argue I am being dishonest to the store because I really want 6 lbs. of sugar?

Let's say Joe Blow applies to work at Goldman and would prefer to work there, but JP Morgan calls back first and offers $150K to work there as an analyst. Joe Blow should turn down $150K because Goldman is his first choice and some other guy's first choice is to work at JP Morgan? Better yet, if Goldman calls a month after he takes the job at JP Morgan and offers him $160K, he should stay there just because he owes it to the guy who dreamed of working at JP Morgan, or because JP Morgan invested time and money on recruiting and training him?

Lastly: Plenty of people take the NYPD and FDNY tests because, despite being hard - sometimes deadly - jobs that aren't very high paying, they pay a living wage and offer comprehensive benefits. It's a way to feed your family while you wait for something else higher paying or less demanding to become available. Meanwhile some people who dreamed their whole lives of doing these jobs - many times people who would be 4th or 5th generation On The Job - don't score high enough on the test to make the cutoff for the next Academy class. God forbid you were in a burning building, would you want the more capable person - even if it's not his dream job or one he will stay in for more than a couple years - to be your rescuer, or the less capable guy he deferred to because it was the "ethical" thing to do?

I think the point that you bring up (that no test can truly provide a measure) is quite pertinent- and is at the crux of this debate. There's no real way to completely accurately measure any such skills by testing, and the GRE is no exception.

That said, when comparing students from all different schools and systems all over the world, having some baseline measure can be quite helpful- and that, in my mind, is what the GRE provides. It's not a central factor to admissions (in most cases), but it allows Adcoms to compare the range of students with some metric, and can be especially helpful when it comes to schools (or countries) with which they have no direct knowledge.

Personally, I have yet to talk to any prof doing admissions that thinks the GREs are very important- I think it's primarily applicants that place such a large amount of importance on them.

To your example of texts from outside the readers fields- none of them are outside of what someone could be reasonably expected to understand. The section you refer to was not "dense in biological terminology", but was rather a passage with some biological trappings, that should be interpretable to almost anyone that would be taking the GRE. By your logic, what passages could we use? Nothing could reference literature, history, sociology, politics, or current events.

I understand your point of view, but in my point it's not that the test shouldn't be used, or that the test is flawed, but rather that it should be understood to have specific constraints- within the constraints of the test, it's a good measure of those skills. But that's true for any test or measure. One of the important things in research in general is to understand that *any* data you collect from *any* source is only valid within the context of the source! The GRE is no exception to that rule, and other than people posting on these fora, I have yet to hear anyone suggest that the test scores are generalizable.

Compared to where, Europe? Tipping at restaurants and bars (not to mention for cab rides, deliveries, etc.) is customary all over the US. It is not just for exceptional service.


Anyone in the service industry makes a little over $2/hr. This is customary.


Now before you think I'm just attacking you, it sounds like this bar really does suck and the bartender may indeed be a dope who is just there to chase tail. In that case you give him (and by extension, the barback, food runner, and back of the house none of whose fault it is) his $1 and you leave. There are lots of bars that are not obnoxious and don't charge covers. It also helps to go during the week instead of on Friday and Saturday nights. Those are "amateur nights".


Well, then don't go out. If you can't pay, you can't play. I don't see why the bartender should have to pay (he has to tip out on his sales) to serve you; it's not his fault he got stuck with a cheap grad student (no one made you do it!) who gets paid to sit at a desk all day.

It's a free country and you can do what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised at getting a negative response nor should you be surprised if you get poor service when you don't pay for it. You can always get a 6-pack at the corner store if it's that big of a deal to you.

Why? If someone can take advantage of a market inefficiency, that makes him a good consumer.

When the grocery store has a sale on 2 lbs. of sugar for $1, you would seriously argue that I ethically should buy the 6 lb. package for $3.99 instead of 3 2 lb. packages for $3, just in case some guy who only needs 2 lbs. can buy his for $1? Would you also argue I am being dishonest to the store because I really want 6 lbs. of sugar?

Let's say Joe Blow applies to work at Goldman and would prefer to work there, but JP Morgan calls back first and offers $150K to work there as an analyst. Joe Blow should turn down $150K because Goldman is his first choice and some other guy's first choice is to work at JP Morgan? Better yet, if Goldman calls a month after he takes the job at JP Morgan and offers him $160K, he should stay there just because he owes it to the guy who dreamed of working at JP Morgan, or because JP Morgan invested time and money on recruiting and training him?

Lastly: Plenty of people take the NYPD and FDNY tests because, despite being hard - sometimes deadly - jobs that aren't very high paying, they pay a living wage and offer comprehensive benefits. It's a way to feed your family while you wait for something else higher paying or less demanding to become available. Meanwhile some people who dreamed their whole lives of doing these jobs - many times people who would be 4th or 5th generation On The Job - don't score high enough on the test to make the cutoff for the next Academy class. God forbid you were in a burning building, would you want the more capable person - even if it's not his dream job or one he will stay in for more than a couple years - to be your rescuer, or the less capable guy he deferred to because it was the "ethical" thing to do?

Compared to where, Europe? Tipping at restaurants and bars (not to mention for cab rides, deliveries, etc.) is customary all over the US. It is not just for exceptional service.


Anyone in the service industry makes a little over $2/hr. This is customary.


Now before you think I'm just attacking you, it sounds like this bar really does suck and the bartender may indeed be a dope who is just there to chase tail. In that case you give him (and by extension, the barback, food runner, and back of the house none of whose fault it is) his $1 and you leave. There are lots of bars that are not obnoxious and don't charge covers. It also helps to go during the week instead of on Friday and Saturday nights. Those are "amateur nights".


Well, then don't go out. If you can't pay, you can't play. I don't see why the bartender should have to pay (he has to tip out on his sales) to serve you; it's not his fault he got stuck with a cheap grad student (no one made you do it!) who gets paid to sit at a desk all day.

It's a free country and you can do what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised at getting a negative response nor should you be surprised if you get poor service when you don't pay for it. You can always get a 6-pack at the corner store if it's that big of a deal to you.

In NY, tipping is a much bigger deal than elsewhere. I personally do not tip if they're giving me a water (or a drink). I'm tipping them to pour something into a cup. That's ridiculous. I don't care what agreement they signed up for wage wise. I didn't force them to and I'm not going to tip them because the bar decided to give them a bad deal.

Maybe because I'm a guy I want to tip even less. Half the time, I'll be waiting 5 or more minutes in a crowded bar for my first drink because girls are served first, even if they just showed up. I'm not going to tip someone who doesn't respect me enough to take me in turn.

I'm sour about it. I don't have enough money to give to charity let alone a bar tender. I don't get tips for getting good grades or coding well.

Why? If someone can take advantage of a market inefficiency, that makes him a good consumer.

When the grocery store has a sale on 2 lbs. of sugar for $1, you would seriously argue that I ethically should buy the 6 lb. package for $3.99 instead of 3 2 lb. packages for $3, just in case some guy who only needs 2 lbs. can buy his for $1? Would you also argue I am being dishonest to the store because I really want 6 lbs. of sugar?

Let's say Joe Blow applies to work at Goldman and would prefer to work there, but JP Morgan calls back first and offers $150K to work there as an analyst. Joe Blow should turn down $150K because Goldman is his first choice and some other guy's first choice is to work at JP Morgan? Better yet, if Goldman calls a month after he takes the job at JP Morgan and offers him $160K, he should stay there just because he owes it to the guy who dreamed of working at JP Morgan, or because JP Morgan invested time and money on recruiting and training him?

Lastly: Plenty of people take the NYPD and FDNY tests because, despite being hard - sometimes deadly - jobs that aren't very high paying, they pay a living wage and offer comprehensive benefits. It's a way to feed your family while you wait for something else higher paying or less demanding to become available. Meanwhile some people who dreamed their whole lives of doing these jobs - many times people who would be 4th or 5th generation On The Job - don't score high enough on the test to make the cutoff for the next Academy class. God forbid you were in a burning building, would you want the more capable person - even if it's not his dream job or one he will stay in for more than a couple years - to be your rescuer, or the less capable guy he deferred to because it was the "ethical" thing to do?

1. There's no reason you have to socialize with these people if you don't want to. Do what you need to do at school, and go home. You're there to earn a degree, not socialize.

2. If you want to socialize, and they're going to a bar, you can go and get club soda. A lot of people who go dry (whether on their own or being in AA) will still go to bars and have club soda. It's a way to hang out in a bar and no one will give you a hard time, and you won't have to go into a song and dance about why you don't drink. Just make sure to tip your bartender.

3. Bars are good networking places (even if you go without your cohort) but so are churches, social clubs, etc. The good thing about bars is that they don't require a commitment.

1. There's no reason you have to socialize with these people if you don't want to. Do what you need to do at school, and go home. You're there to earn a degree, not socialize.

2. If you want to socialize, and they're going to a bar, you can go and get club soda. A lot of people who go dry (whether on their own or being in AA) will still go to bars and have club soda. It's a way to hang out in a bar and no one will give you a hard time, and you won't have to go into a song and dance about why you don't drink. Just make sure to tip your bartender.

3. Bars are good networking places (even if you go without your cohort) but so are churches, social clubs, etc. The good thing about bars is that they don't require a commitment.

1. There's no reason you have to socialize with these people if you don't want to. Do what you need to do at school, and go home. You're there to earn a degree, not socialize.

2. If you want to socialize, and they're going to a bar, you can go and get club soda. A lot of people who go dry (whether on their own or being in AA) will still go to bars and have club soda. It's a way to hang out in a bar and no one will give you a hard time, and you won't have to go into a song and dance about why you don't drink. Just make sure to tip your bartender.

3. Bars are good networking places (even if you go without your cohort) but so are churches, social clubs, etc. The good thing about bars is that they don't require a commitment.

I don't understand what students mean when they say they want to work in "industry" after they get out when they're asked "so what are your future goals and career aspirations?"


Basically it means they have no idea what the hell they're doing and they're just hoping, maybe even expecting, that there will be a job there for them waiting when they get out. Sorry, a PhD after your name doesn't mean there will be anything there after you graduate. Being honest with yourselves, how many of you are hiding out there in grad school really only because you have no idea what you want to do with the rest of your life, or because you didn't want to get a job, or because you couldn't find a job? I laugh every time I hear someone say they want to work in "industry" when they get out, that's like saying "i like food".

How difficult would it be to "pull off" this plan?

If a software engineer works for about three years, and decides that he'd like to have a masters degree in order to bypass Human Resource screenings for new recruits, then couldn't he just apply for a fully funded MS/PhD program?

I plan on working like 20 hours a week without the department noticing, and after the MS requirements are finished, I just drop out, saying a PhD is NOT for me. Free masters, additional work experience (probably at a start-up).

That being said, if you really only want a masters and not a phd, you should not use of the slot of someone who is commited to the phd as a point of ethics.

Honestly, the best I ever did as a grad student was when I was the busiest. And by busiest, I mean fostering two dogs that had never lived indoors before, writing a MA thesis, working a part-time job off campus, and visiting PhD programs that had accepted me. Treating graduate school like a job, wherein I work pretty diligently for 7-8 hours, in my case 9-12 and 2-6ish, has also served me well. It forces me to avoid surfing the web and focus and then, once that's done, I have time to watch TV or a movie, read a book, cook dinner, and do the activities I enjoy.

Graduate school, just like work, is all about balance. It can consume your life if you let it. But don't let it.

I think this is the most compelling argument I have seen. You would have to consider the SOP the same as qualifications (GRE, transcripts, letters), and I'm not sure I buy that. However I think you're on to something, where the OP should just mention his interest in working in industry right off the bat which would serve both his and the uni's purposes as well. Then, no red flags will be raised as to why his interests (including internships and the like) are centered on industry-specific knowledge and/or research.

A counter-argument would be that there are plenty of folks who really are fascinated by subject X and working with Dr. Z, but for various reasons - academic, personal (spouse, etc.), career (getting hired only a couple of years into the program) - they change their minds later. I don't think that makes them bad or even people who did not fulfill their commitments.

Plenty of people go to school to improve their career opportunities; it's not as if the only reason to get a PhD is to work in academia. Even my advisors have told me that many folks leave as ABD's when they are offered jobs, because not many people pass up 80 to 100K a year just to do a dissertation to earn the PhD.
Also why is it disgusting for someone to spend money that he saved at nice restaurants or anywhere else for that matter? We're still a capitalist country, and people go where they get the best deals. If this guy can get his school paid for, good for him. If he wants to blow it on eating out, or even hookers and drugs, good for him.

President, as long as you do your TA'ing or whatever the school makes you do during your studies, you're doing nothing wrong. No one signs a blood oath saying he is going to finish his program. Many people don't finish programs for one reason or another, including that they find a job. So leaving with your MS is nothing to feel bad about, and there is nothing unethical about it either. You are not "stealing someone else's spot" in a program, that's rubbish; YOU earned the spot by having a superior application. It is yours to utilize as you see fit.

Plenty of people go to school to improve their career opportunities; it's not as if the only reason to get a PhD is to work in academia. Even my advisors have told me that many folks leave as ABD's when they are offered jobs, because not many people pass up 80 to 100K a year just to do a dissertation to earn the PhD.
Also why is it disgusting for someone to spend money that he saved at nice restaurants or anywhere else for that matter? We're still a capitalist country, and people go where they get the best deals. If this guy can get his school paid for, good for him. If he wants to blow it on eating out, or even hookers and drugs, good for him.

President, as long as you do your TA'ing or whatever the school makes you do during your studies, you're doing nothing wrong. No one signs a blood oath saying he is going to finish his program. Many people don't finish programs for one reason or another, including that they find a job. So leaving with your MS is nothing to feel bad about, and there is nothing unethical about it either. You are not "stealing someone else's spot" in a program, that's rubbish; YOU earned the spot by having a superior application. It is yours to utilize as you see fit.

Plenty of people go to school to improve their career opportunities; it's not as if the only reason to get a PhD is to work in academia. Even my advisors have told me that many folks leave as ABD's when they are offered jobs, because not many people pass up 80 to 100K a year just to do a dissertation to earn the PhD.
Also why is it disgusting for someone to spend money that he saved at nice restaurants or anywhere else for that matter? We're still a capitalist country, and people go where they get the best deals. If this guy can get his school paid for, good for him. If he wants to blow it on eating out, or even hookers and drugs, good for him.

President, as long as you do your TA'ing or whatever the school makes you do during your studies, you're doing nothing wrong. No one signs a blood oath saying he is going to finish his program. Many people don't finish programs for one reason or another, including that they find a job. So leaving with your MS is nothing to feel bad about, and there is nothing unethical about it either. You are not "stealing someone else's spot" in a program, that's rubbish; YOU earned the spot by having a superior application. It is yours to utilize as you see fit.

Before we got married 3 years ago, my wife and I spent over 10 years living 1.5 hours apart by car. When we were younger without cars the first couple years of that was over 3 hours by public transit. So it's absolutely possible. The question is whether you both really want it or not. If you do and he does, there's no problem.

Before we got married 3 years ago, my wife and I spent over 10 years living 1.5 hours apart by car. When we were younger without cars the first couple years of that was over 3 hours by public transit. So it's absolutely possible. The question is whether you both really want it or not. If you do and he does, there's no problem.

Hi rising_star,

Well, I don't have a problem befriending MA students per se. I'm good friends with two MA students who are in the thesis option and are very serious and intend to apply to PhD programs. My beef is with MA students in general, and how immature many (if not most) of them are/can be. I feel that being too involved with them, yes, diminishes my standing, because it drags me into fights/drama that I think serious PhD students would avoid.

I remember how, during my undergrad years, my TAs (all PhD students) were very serious and based on what I saw at my department back then, never really hung out with MA students, and actually mostly kept to themselves when at school. To me, that's what PhD students are "typically" like, and what I saw at my current university is entirely different than what I had expected to see, and somehow, it feels strange / not right. I don't know if my TAs were different outside the school environment -- could be. My question was about both hanging out with MA students while at the department as well as socializing with them outside the academic environment.

My strained relations with a few MA students has left me wondering if it was because I stooped to their level of immaturity in hanging out with them? I don't know, just thinking out loud. Don't get me wrong, I'm not the elitist kind -- if I had been, I wouldn't have befriended them to begin with. But some of my experiences with some MA students has left me wondering if it's better off being disliked for not being social enough, than being disrespected and laughed at and badmouthed, after being too social?

I don't know -- I just wanted to hear other peoples' views about this, and their experiences with it.

I guess this thread really links up with my post in one of the other threads, about profs looking at PhD students as soon-to-be-colleagues, whereas MA students are typically viewed as, just out of undergrad, or, at best, as aspiring PhD students. My profs talk to me differently than the way they talk to MA students. It's quite obvious that they consider us as almost their equals, whereas MA students are mostly seen as, well, students.