surefire

Thanks for the elaboration, it makes it easier to see where you're coming from.
 
This sentence that I've quoted is where you're going off the rails a little bit. You are making a mistake in assuming that the addcomm is going to go ahead and do the work of mentally slotting you in with some available profs. They have hundreds of apps to read, you can't expect them to do this, this is work that YOU should be doing - that is, articulating a RELEVANT research fit with some AVAILABLE faculty. You are not hedging your bets by avoiding any tailoring at the risk of excluding a potential POI - that is a weak and paralyzing approach, better to just DO YOUR BEST to research the department/program and try to account for a good chunk of the prospective fits (and maybe name one or two of the MOST relevant, as determined by your research effort). The statement is not a test with one right answer, where you can avoid flunking because you're leaving up to the adcomm to project the correct response; you might not end up working with the faculty that you name - adcomms KNOW this - the "test" is seeing whether or not you can articulate your interests aptly and whether or not you can identify resources that make sense. You should generally aim to establish "fit" in two respects: why THIS discipline and why THIS institution/program. You've established a great statement for the former, now you need to tailor a bit to capture the latter. I would suggest a sentence or two at the end of your "areas of interest" bit, where you can connect it by stating that your interests would be extended/cultivated by (specific resource in program) given (something relevant about that resource that parallels your interests). It doesn't HAVE to be a faculty member; I'm in a different field, and sometimes people cite program specializations or department conferences or a university's research institute that can be relevantly connected to their interests. You don't HAVE to read the work of every prof in the department (that is an anemic rationale for not doing the "fit" work); look at faculty pages and see who has listed areas of interest that parallel yours, and then skim through THEIR articles (and check to see if maybe they're going on sabbatical before naming them); faculty interests do not have to DIRECTLY mirror yours or be "obvious" on first blush (if they already had a faculty person doing your EXACT interests, they wouldn't take you anyway right? what would be the point?), the point is to find someone relevant and articulate the fit.
 
Best of luck, you've made a good start here!

3rd-year PhD here! There's LOTS of great advice on the forum, but here are some quick points that I wish someone had told me in my first year:
 
(1.) Lots of good advice on this list, pick a couple items out (especially the ones about forming good habits) and commit to trying them: http://scholarshape.com/blog/2014/3/18/101-tips-for-finishing-your-phd-quickly
 
(2.) Try to get social like, once a week. While out, especially with other grad students, talk out your projects a bit (but talk about other stuff too!). You'll be amazed at how often things "click" while you're talking them out. The majority of my academic epiphanies happen when I give my eyes/brain some space from my desk, either (a.) while I'm being social (b.) when I'm in the shower (c.) when I'm at the gym.
 
(3.) Go to the gym! Or join a rec league or something. Just, move! Don't let your social skills OR your muscles atrophy!
 
(4.) Identify the time of day when you're most productive and schedule the harder/higher priority tasks for that time period.
 
(5.) Related to number 4 (and what some have said about trying to predict burn-out): know the difference between pushing through a rough patch and straight-up PUNISHING yourself. There's something in the academic culture that makes grad students think that, if they're not actively producing while working, they should at least be sitting at their desk SUFFERING and feeling bad about it - don't do that! Don't sit staring at a blank document for hours. There's a distinction between "this task sucks and I don't want to do it but there's a deadline" (pushing through a rough patch) and the paralyzing "I don't know how to proceed" (and then punishing). If you're experiencing the latter, step away, do something else for a bit, consult some resources (asking a supervisor or colleagues, advice from good websites on how to do specific stuff (The Professor Is In; Get a Life, PhD; Explorations of style - some of my faves), seminars/workshops offered by your SGS), then come back to the task and do something different in your approach as informed by your advice-seeking (can't make sense of a piece you're writing? print it out! for example).
 
(6.) Said in the above but worthy of its own point - ask for help! It was a turning point for me last year when I discovered some of the workshop series that my institution offers (like, a prof wanted me to do some research with software that I had no idea how to use, so I went to a three-hour workshop on it, this is vastly preferred to spending a full day or so figuring it out on my own). You are not the first on the planet to struggle with some of this stuff (especially the things that you THINK you should know how to do, like time management or public speaking) so why not benefit from those that came before you and glean the strategies that they've developed to tackle stuff! You are surrounded by smart people, utilize them! You PAY for some of the institutional structures that exist at your university via your tuition (EVEN when you have funding/get remissions) so USE them! Does your Uni have a writing centre? USE IT! Seminars on "how to be a more efficient TA"? GO TO THOSE.
 
(7.) NAP. Oh man, power naps! The ultimate brain re-set! I myself have come to embrace the "caffeine nap" once or twice a week - that is, I down a coffee or tea, nap for 20 minutes (the amount of time the caffeine needs to get in my system) and then get up totally re-energized and feeling sharp!
 
(8.) Find some organizational apps that work for you and use them. I like Zotero for citations and I'm a recent convert to Workflowy (thanks to fuzzylogician).
 
(9.) Do a little something that gives you an appreciation/understanding of your departmental/discipline culture. I know that you don't think you have time to go to speaker series or job talks or some kind of service association meetings, but these will give you a great sense of what is prioritized in your area, who the big-wigs are, what's in store for you and on and on. Again, this is more efficient than just trying to absorb these intangibles by reading journals in your area.
 
(10.) Teach others how to do stuff. This will enforce it in your own brain and aid the collegiality generally. Nothing irritates me more than people who TAKE other people's advice or drafts of grant applications or information about interesting conferences but they don't reciprocate and foster this "well, more for me" mindset. Appreciate the successes of your colleagues, rather than coveting. Learn to collaborate and share and be helpful. Look out for yourself, for sure, but don't undermine others and, as in life, follow the Wil Wheaton maxim: "Don't be a dick".
 
Suerte!

3rd-year PhD here! There's LOTS of great advice on the forum, but here are some quick points that I wish someone had told me in my first year:
 
(1.) Lots of good advice on this list, pick a couple items out (especially the ones about forming good habits) and commit to trying them: http://scholarshape.com/blog/2014/3/18/101-tips-for-finishing-your-phd-quickly
 
(2.) Try to get social like, once a week. While out, especially with other grad students, talk out your projects a bit (but talk about other stuff too!). You'll be amazed at how often things "click" while you're talking them out. The majority of my academic epiphanies happen when I give my eyes/brain some space from my desk, either (a.) while I'm being social (b.) when I'm in the shower (c.) when I'm at the gym.
 
(3.) Go to the gym! Or join a rec league or something. Just, move! Don't let your social skills OR your muscles atrophy!
 
(4.) Identify the time of day when you're most productive and schedule the harder/higher priority tasks for that time period.
 
(5.) Related to number 4 (and what some have said about trying to predict burn-out): know the difference between pushing through a rough patch and straight-up PUNISHING yourself. There's something in the academic culture that makes grad students think that, if they're not actively producing while working, they should at least be sitting at their desk SUFFERING and feeling bad about it - don't do that! Don't sit staring at a blank document for hours. There's a distinction between "this task sucks and I don't want to do it but there's a deadline" (pushing through a rough patch) and the paralyzing "I don't know how to proceed" (and then punishing). If you're experiencing the latter, step away, do something else for a bit, consult some resources (asking a supervisor or colleagues, advice from good websites on how to do specific stuff (The Professor Is In; Get a Life, PhD; Explorations of style - some of my faves), seminars/workshops offered by your SGS), then come back to the task and do something different in your approach as informed by your advice-seeking (can't make sense of a piece you're writing? print it out! for example).
 
(6.) Said in the above but worthy of its own point - ask for help! It was a turning point for me last year when I discovered some of the workshop series that my institution offers (like, a prof wanted me to do some research with software that I had no idea how to use, so I went to a three-hour workshop on it, this is vastly preferred to spending a full day or so figuring it out on my own). You are not the first on the planet to struggle with some of this stuff (especially the things that you THINK you should know how to do, like time management or public speaking) so why not benefit from those that came before you and glean the strategies that they've developed to tackle stuff! You are surrounded by smart people, utilize them! You PAY for some of the institutional structures that exist at your university via your tuition (EVEN when you have funding/get remissions) so USE them! Does your Uni have a writing centre? USE IT! Seminars on "how to be a more efficient TA"? GO TO THOSE.
 
(7.) NAP. Oh man, power naps! The ultimate brain re-set! I myself have come to embrace the "caffeine nap" once or twice a week - that is, I down a coffee or tea, nap for 20 minutes (the amount of time the caffeine needs to get in my system) and then get up totally re-energized and feeling sharp!
 
(8.) Find some organizational apps that work for you and use them. I like Zotero for citations and I'm a recent convert to Workflowy (thanks to fuzzylogician).
 
(9.) Do a little something that gives you an appreciation/understanding of your departmental/discipline culture. I know that you don't think you have time to go to speaker series or job talks or some kind of service association meetings, but these will give you a great sense of what is prioritized in your area, who the big-wigs are, what's in store for you and on and on. Again, this is more efficient than just trying to absorb these intangibles by reading journals in your area.
 
(10.) Teach others how to do stuff. This will enforce it in your own brain and aid the collegiality generally. Nothing irritates me more than people who TAKE other people's advice or drafts of grant applications or information about interesting conferences but they don't reciprocate and foster this "well, more for me" mindset. Appreciate the successes of your colleagues, rather than coveting. Learn to collaborate and share and be helpful. Look out for yourself, for sure, but don't undermine others and, as in life, follow the Wil Wheaton maxim: "Don't be a dick".
 
Suerte!

3rd-year PhD here! There's LOTS of great advice on the forum, but here are some quick points that I wish someone had told me in my first year:
 
(1.) Lots of good advice on this list, pick a couple items out (especially the ones about forming good habits) and commit to trying them: http://scholarshape.com/blog/2014/3/18/101-tips-for-finishing-your-phd-quickly
 
(2.) Try to get social like, once a week. While out, especially with other grad students, talk out your projects a bit (but talk about other stuff too!). You'll be amazed at how often things "click" while you're talking them out. The majority of my academic epiphanies happen when I give my eyes/brain some space from my desk, either (a.) while I'm being social (b.) when I'm in the shower (c.) when I'm at the gym.
 
(3.) Go to the gym! Or join a rec league or something. Just, move! Don't let your social skills OR your muscles atrophy!
 
(4.) Identify the time of day when you're most productive and schedule the harder/higher priority tasks for that time period.
 
(5.) Related to number 4 (and what some have said about trying to predict burn-out): know the difference between pushing through a rough patch and straight-up PUNISHING yourself. There's something in the academic culture that makes grad students think that, if they're not actively producing while working, they should at least be sitting at their desk SUFFERING and feeling bad about it - don't do that! Don't sit staring at a blank document for hours. There's a distinction between "this task sucks and I don't want to do it but there's a deadline" (pushing through a rough patch) and the paralyzing "I don't know how to proceed" (and then punishing). If you're experiencing the latter, step away, do something else for a bit, consult some resources (asking a supervisor or colleagues, advice from good websites on how to do specific stuff (The Professor Is In; Get a Life, PhD; Explorations of style - some of my faves), seminars/workshops offered by your SGS), then come back to the task and do something different in your approach as informed by your advice-seeking (can't make sense of a piece you're writing? print it out! for example).
 
(6.) Said in the above but worthy of its own point - ask for help! It was a turning point for me last year when I discovered some of the workshop series that my institution offers (like, a prof wanted me to do some research with software that I had no idea how to use, so I went to a three-hour workshop on it, this is vastly preferred to spending a full day or so figuring it out on my own). You are not the first on the planet to struggle with some of this stuff (especially the things that you THINK you should know how to do, like time management or public speaking) so why not benefit from those that came before you and glean the strategies that they've developed to tackle stuff! You are surrounded by smart people, utilize them! You PAY for some of the institutional structures that exist at your university via your tuition (EVEN when you have funding/get remissions) so USE them! Does your Uni have a writing centre? USE IT! Seminars on "how to be a more efficient TA"? GO TO THOSE.
 
(7.) NAP. Oh man, power naps! The ultimate brain re-set! I myself have come to embrace the "caffeine nap" once or twice a week - that is, I down a coffee or tea, nap for 20 minutes (the amount of time the caffeine needs to get in my system) and then get up totally re-energized and feeling sharp!
 
(8.) Find some organizational apps that work for you and use them. I like Zotero for citations and I'm a recent convert to Workflowy (thanks to fuzzylogician).
 
(9.) Do a little something that gives you an appreciation/understanding of your departmental/discipline culture. I know that you don't think you have time to go to speaker series or job talks or some kind of service association meetings, but these will give you a great sense of what is prioritized in your area, who the big-wigs are, what's in store for you and on and on. Again, this is more efficient than just trying to absorb these intangibles by reading journals in your area.
 
(10.) Teach others how to do stuff. This will enforce it in your own brain and aid the collegiality generally. Nothing irritates me more than people who TAKE other people's advice or drafts of grant applications or information about interesting conferences but they don't reciprocate and foster this "well, more for me" mindset. Appreciate the successes of your colleagues, rather than coveting. Learn to collaborate and share and be helpful. Look out for yourself, for sure, but don't undermine others and, as in life, follow the Wil Wheaton maxim: "Don't be a dick".
 
Suerte!

3rd-year PhD here! There's LOTS of great advice on the forum, but here are some quick points that I wish someone had told me in my first year:
 
(1.) Lots of good advice on this list, pick a couple items out (especially the ones about forming good habits) and commit to trying them: http://scholarshape.com/blog/2014/3/18/101-tips-for-finishing-your-phd-quickly
 
(2.) Try to get social like, once a week. While out, especially with other grad students, talk out your projects a bit (but talk about other stuff too!). You'll be amazed at how often things "click" while you're talking them out. The majority of my academic epiphanies happen when I give my eyes/brain some space from my desk, either (a.) while I'm being social (b.) when I'm in the shower (c.) when I'm at the gym.
 
(3.) Go to the gym! Or join a rec league or something. Just, move! Don't let your social skills OR your muscles atrophy!
 
(4.) Identify the time of day when you're most productive and schedule the harder/higher priority tasks for that time period.
 
(5.) Related to number 4 (and what some have said about trying to predict burn-out): know the difference between pushing through a rough patch and straight-up PUNISHING yourself. There's something in the academic culture that makes grad students think that, if they're not actively producing while working, they should at least be sitting at their desk SUFFERING and feeling bad about it - don't do that! Don't sit staring at a blank document for hours. There's a distinction between "this task sucks and I don't want to do it but there's a deadline" (pushing through a rough patch) and the paralyzing "I don't know how to proceed" (and then punishing). If you're experiencing the latter, step away, do something else for a bit, consult some resources (asking a supervisor or colleagues, advice from good websites on how to do specific stuff (The Professor Is In; Get a Life, PhD; Explorations of style - some of my faves), seminars/workshops offered by your SGS), then come back to the task and do something different in your approach as informed by your advice-seeking (can't make sense of a piece you're writing? print it out! for example).
 
(6.) Said in the above but worthy of its own point - ask for help! It was a turning point for me last year when I discovered some of the workshop series that my institution offers (like, a prof wanted me to do some research with software that I had no idea how to use, so I went to a three-hour workshop on it, this is vastly preferred to spending a full day or so figuring it out on my own). You are not the first on the planet to struggle with some of this stuff (especially the things that you THINK you should know how to do, like time management or public speaking) so why not benefit from those that came before you and glean the strategies that they've developed to tackle stuff! You are surrounded by smart people, utilize them! You PAY for some of the institutional structures that exist at your university via your tuition (EVEN when you have funding/get remissions) so USE them! Does your Uni have a writing centre? USE IT! Seminars on "how to be a more efficient TA"? GO TO THOSE.
 
(7.) NAP. Oh man, power naps! The ultimate brain re-set! I myself have come to embrace the "caffeine nap" once or twice a week - that is, I down a coffee or tea, nap for 20 minutes (the amount of time the caffeine needs to get in my system) and then get up totally re-energized and feeling sharp!
 
(8.) Find some organizational apps that work for you and use them. I like Zotero for citations and I'm a recent convert to Workflowy (thanks to fuzzylogician).
 
(9.) Do a little something that gives you an appreciation/understanding of your departmental/discipline culture. I know that you don't think you have time to go to speaker series or job talks or some kind of service association meetings, but these will give you a great sense of what is prioritized in your area, who the big-wigs are, what's in store for you and on and on. Again, this is more efficient than just trying to absorb these intangibles by reading journals in your area.
 
(10.) Teach others how to do stuff. This will enforce it in your own brain and aid the collegiality generally. Nothing irritates me more than people who TAKE other people's advice or drafts of grant applications or information about interesting conferences but they don't reciprocate and foster this "well, more for me" mindset. Appreciate the successes of your colleagues, rather than coveting. Learn to collaborate and share and be helpful. Look out for yourself, for sure, but don't undermine others and, as in life, follow the Wil Wheaton maxim: "Don't be a dick".
 
Suerte!

3rd-year PhD here! There's LOTS of great advice on the forum, but here are some quick points that I wish someone had told me in my first year:
 
(1.) Lots of good advice on this list, pick a couple items out (especially the ones about forming good habits) and commit to trying them: http://scholarshape.com/blog/2014/3/18/101-tips-for-finishing-your-phd-quickly
 
(2.) Try to get social like, once a week. While out, especially with other grad students, talk out your projects a bit (but talk about other stuff too!). You'll be amazed at how often things "click" while you're talking them out. The majority of my academic epiphanies happen when I give my eyes/brain some space from my desk, either (a.) while I'm being social (b.) when I'm in the shower (c.) when I'm at the gym.
 
(3.) Go to the gym! Or join a rec league or something. Just, move! Don't let your social skills OR your muscles atrophy!
 
(4.) Identify the time of day when you're most productive and schedule the harder/higher priority tasks for that time period.
 
(5.) Related to number 4 (and what some have said about trying to predict burn-out): know the difference between pushing through a rough patch and straight-up PUNISHING yourself. There's something in the academic culture that makes grad students think that, if they're not actively producing while working, they should at least be sitting at their desk SUFFERING and feeling bad about it - don't do that! Don't sit staring at a blank document for hours. There's a distinction between "this task sucks and I don't want to do it but there's a deadline" (pushing through a rough patch) and the paralyzing "I don't know how to proceed" (and then punishing). If you're experiencing the latter, step away, do something else for a bit, consult some resources (asking a supervisor or colleagues, advice from good websites on how to do specific stuff (The Professor Is In; Get a Life, PhD; Explorations of style - some of my faves), seminars/workshops offered by your SGS), then come back to the task and do something different in your approach as informed by your advice-seeking (can't make sense of a piece you're writing? print it out! for example).
 
(6.) Said in the above but worthy of its own point - ask for help! It was a turning point for me last year when I discovered some of the workshop series that my institution offers (like, a prof wanted me to do some research with software that I had no idea how to use, so I went to a three-hour workshop on it, this is vastly preferred to spending a full day or so figuring it out on my own). You are not the first on the planet to struggle with some of this stuff (especially the things that you THINK you should know how to do, like time management or public speaking) so why not benefit from those that came before you and glean the strategies that they've developed to tackle stuff! You are surrounded by smart people, utilize them! You PAY for some of the institutional structures that exist at your university via your tuition (EVEN when you have funding/get remissions) so USE them! Does your Uni have a writing centre? USE IT! Seminars on "how to be a more efficient TA"? GO TO THOSE.
 
(7.) NAP. Oh man, power naps! The ultimate brain re-set! I myself have come to embrace the "caffeine nap" once or twice a week - that is, I down a coffee or tea, nap for 20 minutes (the amount of time the caffeine needs to get in my system) and then get up totally re-energized and feeling sharp!
 
(8.) Find some organizational apps that work for you and use them. I like Zotero for citations and I'm a recent convert to Workflowy (thanks to fuzzylogician).
 
(9.) Do a little something that gives you an appreciation/understanding of your departmental/discipline culture. I know that you don't think you have time to go to speaker series or job talks or some kind of service association meetings, but these will give you a great sense of what is prioritized in your area, who the big-wigs are, what's in store for you and on and on. Again, this is more efficient than just trying to absorb these intangibles by reading journals in your area.
 
(10.) Teach others how to do stuff. This will enforce it in your own brain and aid the collegiality generally. Nothing irritates me more than people who TAKE other people's advice or drafts of grant applications or information about interesting conferences but they don't reciprocate and foster this "well, more for me" mindset. Appreciate the successes of your colleagues, rather than coveting. Learn to collaborate and share and be helpful. Look out for yourself, for sure, but don't undermine others and, as in life, follow the Wil Wheaton maxim: "Don't be a dick".
 
Suerte!

For almost all of my applications, they send the email either:
 
1. When you enter the contact information for each recommender (you can usually skip right to this page and not fill in the rest of the application yet)
 
or
 
2. When you enter the contact information for all of your recommenders and then hit "send" on the LOR page. (again, you can skip right to this page if you want the requests to go out now but not fill in your application info until later).
 
In only one case did a school require me to actually submit the application before they would send the LOR request.

This wouldn't be "wrong", I think it makes sense to have the university's crest or whatever on your card, but do a little bit of recon to find out what is typically done.
I actually endeavoured to have cards made last year. I knew of a good business card guy that my friends used and I was looking through my university's website (communications and marketing dept.) to see if they had any standard templates for business cards with the crest.
 
Turns out my university REQUIRES people to request business cards through them. It's a PR thing and they prize standardized cards, which makes sense. So, I had to make an order through my department's grad secretary, who submitted it to the university. My university is big, so this might not be standard practice in all institutions, but definitely check around to make sure! I'm happy with the cards and it's nice to have a standardized (albeit uncreative) card that resembles the ones my profs have (though I wasn't pleased about shelling out $40, I could've gotten a much better deal on my own, but them's the breaks!).
 
FWIW, as per previous items in this thread, I find the cards to be invaluable at conferences and the like. If you get talking to someone and you have to part ways, they may not always say, "do you have a card?", but if they say, "we should talk more about this", then you take out the card and write the name of the conference you're at and a keyword (the "this" that you want to keep in touch about) on the back, and maybe something will come of it! Even if you don't keep in-touch every time, it's worth it for that one time that the person decides to do something about the "this" (put together a panel or a call for papers or something) and they think of you and touch base (or, alternatively, you do something about the "this" and touch base with them!). That's been my experience anyway.

Keep in mind that there is a middle ground you want to see on the length of time - too short or too long are both bad.  You need enough time to get pubs in order to be competitive on the market, but you don't want to languish away in your program either.  I think insufficient funding is often at the root of either extreme.  The consensus I get from professors in my program is that 5-6 years is kind of ideal.  
 
Required coursework and overall structure can vary widely by program, so that can be a factor in time-to-degree; if you have to take 2 years of coursework vs. 3, when you take comps, etc.  Also, if a program is heavily qualitative, I'd assume their average time would be longer just due to the composition of their cohorts.  And, of course, program time can be affected by a lot of individual factors - research methodology, whether you come in with a master's, funding source, etc.  I didn't take time-to-degree into account when applying, but I definitely asked about it after being accepted and talked with students and potential advisors to get a real sense of how long it would take under my particular circumstances.

Most Canadian programs do not require GRE scores either. Standardized tests don't mean much, IMO. No Child Left Behind is an example of what education has come down to when standardized tests come into play.
I wouldn't say that they are a low level program. It's just that they consider other aspects of the application to be more important (which may even be a good thing).

For those interested in reviewing SSHRC competition results, they have just been posted on SSHRC website:
 
http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/results-resultats/recipients-recipiendaires/index-eng.aspx

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.
 
What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.
 
Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;
 
The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.
 
So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.
 
I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).
 
Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.
 
Good luck!

I just wanted to chime in to say that this is LEGIT THE SWEETEST THING! What an awesome gesture! My day is actually better knowing that there are people like you around, plotting little ways to aid beleaguered loved ones in PhD programs!
 
Fuzzy is on-point (as per usual!)
 
I like having a little plant on my desk, but I'm wanting for outdoor space in my urban apartment! I used to have a little tea/coffee station but I have replaced it lately with a good carafe that is superb! I like having tea/coffee on the go all day, and this thing keeps it warm for 8 solid hours. Seriously, I could write sonnets about this device (and I might too, to avoid my own dissertation work).
 
This is the one that I've got: http://www.amazon.com/Copco-Chloe-Thermal-Capacity-Carafe/dp/B000MAOOLE/ref=sr_1_1?s=home-garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1411512250&sr=1-1&keywords=copco+chloe+1+quart+thermal+capacity+carafe+white
 
Have fun putting this room together! Your brother is a lucky dude!

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.
 
What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.
 
Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;
 
The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.
 
So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.
 
I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).
 
Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.
 
Good luck!

So my brother is in the middle of writing the dissertation for his PhD. He is going to be coming out to my place (from 600 miles away) to bunker down and finish writing his dissertation. My question for everyone in this forum is: 

If you could write your dissertation in a room with the perfect writing conditions and setup, what would be in that room? 

Things I have thought of are things like a small refrigerator with cold drinks, good lighting, energy drinks... 

What kinds of things could I put in that room that would be helpful for someone grinding out their dissertation? 

Thanks in advance!

Everyone is different and hopefully your brother has a good idea of his own work habits, but let me tell you a bit about how it worked for me. I am a social scientist and basically everything I need for my work is on my computer, so my work environment can be pretty flexible. I don't need a large desk for books and such, but it's important to have a good internet connection since a lot of the material I need is online. It was useful to always have scratch paper in hand and occasionally I would write things on a whiteboard to work stuff out or to keep track of what I was doing. I always kept to-do lists and it helped me a lot to discuss with someone what I was up to and what I was planning to do for that day or that work session. Even if you don't understand what your brother says exactly, it may help him to talk things out loud and it gives some sense of accountability when you have told someone that you'll do X by time Y. Having snacks and a drink nearby also prevent some wandering around and trips to the fridge. Sometimes I played quiet music and sometimes I needed silence. One thing that is important is to have a space where you won't be interrupted and where there aren't (m)any distractions. It's good to have a well-lit work environment with a comfortable chair and desk. However, I also found it helpful to have more than one work environment and to be able to move to a new location whenever I got stuck (either in the house or outside--I had several coffeeshops that I spent a lot of time at). If it's in the house, having a couch or comfortable chair in addition to  the desk might be enough, or the possibility to work outside in the yard if it's not too cold. I can't tell you if any of this would help your brother, but I hope he will appreciate your efforts. Good luck to you both!

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.
 
What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.
 
Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;
 
The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.
 
So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.
 
I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).
 
Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.
 
Good luck!

Good advice above! Breathe!
 
I have a summer TA-ship that technically started in July, and the prof didn't touch base with me until last week (it was to ask whether or not I'd be available to invigilate the mid-term, which was yesterday). I used to stress about the TA assignments, but now I try to take a cue from the prof or instructor as to how laid-back or not the TA post is.
 
I usually abide by some CYA (Cover Your Ass) principles. When I first get confirmation of an assignment, I'll e-mail the prof or instructor just to introduce myself, "I'm surefire and I belong to you to the tune of 120 hours for SuperFun101 next semester". That way, they have my e-mail and an opportunity to elaborate on the appointment, if they feel like it (again, some profs are overzealous and others are laid back). Mostly they'll e-mail back quickly to say, "Thanks. I'll be in touch". On some occasions a prof will e-mail me back to say something like, "Here are the names of other TAs in the course" or "I'm out of town for a conference in October, you'll guest lecture on that date, cool?"; and sometimes I get radio silence. If I don't hear anything, I'll send another e-mail a week or two before the course under the auspices of "checking in". Maybe I'll mention that I read their syllabus from last year, or give them my ID so they can add me to Blackboard, or mention the "hours allocation" form that they typically have to do that gives me a breakdown of the tasks. If I'm a bit concerned about what the appointment entails, I might say, "If I understand the structure of the course, the first task to be attentive to is the assignment due at the end of September", just to try and establish what the first expectation is - this gives them a chance to say, "Oh wait, actually, you're running office hours that start the second week", or something. In any case, I usually get a response at that point.
 
During my early TA appointments, I would sometimes ask students who had TA-ed for a prof before what the assignment was like. That would put me at ease and help me establish the "tone" of the prof. Eventually though, you get good at getting a read on profs and taking a cue from them - it gets easier, promise!

Hi ellen_ai,
 
Welcome to the GC! Funding arrangements vary widely. I'm not in your discipline, but I'm in a grad program at the University of Toronto, so I thought I'd chime in with some details that might help you cohere your search!
 
- First, you generally need an MA to pursue a PhD in Canada, while this isn't the case in the States. I just wanted to point this out as you mentioned that you're looking at both MA and PhD apps, but you can't just segue into a PhD program in Canada without an MA.
- International student spots are competitive and pricey. I typically hear that only 10-25% of a grad program cohort is comprised of international students (this varies across departments and programs though).
- At U of T, the funding arrangement is, generally, as follows: (1) professional MA programs (like an MA in Public Policy) aren't usually funded and they also charge quite a bit more in tuition; (2) the School of Grad Studies allows other programs to fund students for 5 years and then individual programs get to decide if that arrangement will be, say, for a student's 1-year MA plus 4 years of their PhD (this is the case in my program, Sociology) or if they'll just fund 5 years of the PhD straight-up (this is the case in English, where completion times are longer).
- Might you be after, say, an MA in Enviro Science? If so, it appears (on the program's webpage) that U of T/the dept. considers that a "professional" MA program. Here's a link to the funding page: http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/physsci/financial-support-menvsc
^ So, there's no base funding package, but there are opportunities to make money (via TA-ships and the like) AND there's a (funded!: http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/physsci/funding-phd) PhD program to prospectively move into afterwards (this isn't the case for all professional MA programs, like there's no PhD in Public Policy).
 
You'd have to look into the MA here a bit more to see if living on the TA-ship alone is feasible. Generally, you'll have to look into each program on its own merits to suss out details. I applaud your pragmatism here though; while "fit" in a grad program is paramount, I believe it generally behooves grad students to "follow the money".
 
Good luck!

Essential to a short SOP: making it EASY for the adcomm to see why you're applying for (1) THIS field (less necessary when you're entrenched and applying for a PhD, more important for MA applications, especially for diverse programs like the ones you're looking at); (2) THIS institution; (3) THIS department/program.
 
You've likely run across the advice that the SOP is for establishing "fit". "Fit" means (1) What you're bringing to the table and (2) what resources you'll draw upon to thrive and finish. So show them that there's fit by discussing what you've got that they'll be interested in, and what resources they've got that you'll utilize. This should be about your interest/intent/capacity and their faculty/specializations/resources. You could highlight one or two things from the CV to show that you know what's attractive to them, but I wouldn't really recommend re-hashing the CV. Instead, do the translation work for them and show that you have a plan. "(Specific faculty member's) research in (sub-specialty) would assist the development of my research interests in (something specific and parallel)"; "(Institution's research centre) would prove an invaluable resource for my project concerning (data source that the centre has access to)".
 
This is going to be exhausting, because you'll need a different SOP for each (for goodness sake, don't send a form letter), but you'll get better results by tailoring.
Look to each department's website, odds are they'll discuss a specific mandate that highlights their ideologies, what they emphasize, their timelines/expectations, and what they value/try to cultivate in their grad students. My program at U of T, for example, speaks at length about their specialized areas and their commitment to training research "producers", as opposed to "consumers". Don't parrot those things back to them, but take these into account and determine which of these values/resources are echoed by your own established background and future plans. I made damn sure, for example, that I "fit" in one of my program's specialized areas and that my project was "actively" framed to produce something new.
 
Good luck! If you wanna talk U of T specifically, feel free to PM me (you too Dedi, if ya want, though I'm quite a bit further from you, discipline-wise!)

My approach is that I would rather apply twice than apply to safety schools. I am focussing on applying to schools that are the best Research fit and am not really taking prestige into account at all. Do you really want to go to a school that is only okay in your research area? I recommend applying based in research fit and I'm sure you'll be fine!

Don't do it. Stick to 3. Imagine that your admissions committee consists only of tired, over-worked police officers, one month away from retirement, who are assuredly too old for this shit.*
 
*this shit = anything outside of the parameters of what you were specifically asked for in the application instructions.

There is actually a fair amount of linguistics PhD students with backgrounds other than in theoretical linguistics, so your situation may be less unusual than you think. I think it's fine to tell the story of the conference that got you interested in linguistics and how you've worked since then to study as much linguistics as possible. I don't think it's necessary to explain the structure of Italian degrees or grades. I don't think this alone would merit a whole paragraph. It should be just a short few sentences, and although it could be a fine opening paragraph, I can imagine it coming somewhere later in the essay. You might start with what your interests and future plans are, then circle around to your background and preparation, and how you got into linguistics, then explain why the school you are applying to is a good fit. (Alternatively, background - development of interests - current/future plans - fit - also works.)
 
 
  I'm not sure what you mean by personal style. This should be a polished serious document. It's the main place where you get to show yourself and address the admissions committee, and they take it seriously. Treat it as your professional calling card, but you can inject yourself into it and make it personal by talking about your interests and background, which will be unique to you. Essays and articles in linguistics are often written using 1st person pronouns, so that's a fine choice.       I think it's fine to mention theories or streams of thought that interest you. If you are applying to a school where X teaches, you could mention more specifically works or ideas by X that you find exciting. I would not do too much of that, though, and I would try and find ways to connect these detailed ideas to a more general interest of yours - e.g. an interest in bringing new sources of information to bear on traditional theoretical research, such as data from aphasia patients (and other examples, if there are any that are relevant), which can teach us new things about [blah] that theoretical research alone has not been able to solve, or an interest in studying and comparing overt and covert movement [in whatever type of construction/language]. I don't know how much an adcom would like references to papers by researchers who are at other schools; I think it would show better fit if you could tie the kind of work you are interested in to something that researchers at the school you are applying to are engaged in. Presumably you will choose schools that fit your interests and can support your research plans, so this should not be an impossible task.

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.
 
What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.
 
Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;
 
The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.
 
So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.
 
I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).
 
Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.
 
Good luck!

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.
 
What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.
 
Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;
 
The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.
 
So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.
 
I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).
 
Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.
 
Good luck!