ANDS!

Hardly. There is very little that is guaranteed in life. That one should be automatically given a life of happiness because they choose to study Topic X certainly isn't one of them. A programs job is to contribute to the body of knowledge of their field, not to make sure Dick and Jane has sweet jobs lined up at the end of the road.

I am personally an advocate of more intensive career services/workforce development at the undergraduate level, to help stave off people making unrealistic academic decisions. However at the graduate level, you are effectively an adult. At this point you should be aware of the risks/rewards inherent in going down Topic X's route. The program is there to make sure you're qualified should you enter the workforce, not to make sure there is a job.

Hardly. There is very little that is guaranteed in life. That one should be automatically given a life of happiness because they choose to study Topic X certainly isn't one of them. A programs job is to contribute to the body of knowledge of their field, not to make sure Dick and Jane has sweet jobs lined up at the end of the road.

I am personally an advocate of more intensive career services/workforce development at the undergraduate level, to help stave off people making unrealistic academic decisions. However at the graduate level, you are effectively an adult. At this point you should be aware of the risks/rewards inherent in going down Topic X's route. The program is there to make sure you're qualified should you enter the workforce, not to make sure there is a job.

These articles always look at the same people: those with majors where unemployment is highest and job placement is lowest. And thus they create this false sense that "Hey PhD's are worthless."

What these articles need to start digging into is the job search/pre-major prep a lot of those being interviewed did. The woman says she always wanted to teach - well did she gauge the market in her area for a PhD History professor? Not likely. From the moment one steps on campus to the moment they leave, you should be on a constant evaluation of your long term job prospects, as well as what is needed to achieve the most success. Graduating with an expensive PhD in Medieval History and realizing that no one in AZ (something tells me she is locked into the state) will hire you tells me this woman didn't do that.

I'm all for someone doing what they love, but there has to come the realization that not everyone is going to get PAID to do that.

Retake the quantitative? For a theater/drama PhD? Surely you jest.

To the OP, find the school of interest and look at what the emphasize in their admission procedure. It is more than likely that a quantitative score will not be noted, but the verbal will be. You're contributing to the cultural fabric - not building a rocket-ship to Taurus-IV.

Anyone else have to GOOGLE prevarication?

Anyone else have to GOOGLE prevarication?

Anyone else have to GOOGLE prevarication?

Anyone else have to GOOGLE prevarication?

It's all going to be in that Statement of Purpose. That you simply didn't complete your grad requirements a scant few years ago is going to be quite the red flag for people reading your application. I respect that you do not feel that you are a quitter, but that is how the grad. comm. is going to see it without you successfully (and honestly) explaining what happened during your first go around. If the program was a wrong fit, explain why it was the wrong fit and why the program you are wanting to enter now is.

As for how you do this, I would steer clear of "depression" or any psychological talk, and instead couch the discussion in terms of how the lack of fit between you and the material, despite the quality of the program, lead to a disconnect and eventually you deciding to not complete the program instead of putting your name on work you didn't believe in. If any member of the faculty can speak to your talent despite you not finishing, that will be huge for you.

At the end of the day these people (and really anyone who ever "hires" you in the future) is going to want to know: Does this person know what they are doing and is in it for the long haul?

Grad students have been some of the worst dressed people I've seen. The young undergrads come to class decked out; mostly because they are on someone elses dole and can afford to spend their work cash on nice things. This is not to say you HAVE to come looking haggard. However when it comes down to priorities, new clothes, when the ones you have are fine, ranks pretty low.

I just want to say, if you look at the thread title from the front page it says:

"my phd-advisor stole my man"

I have nothing else to contribute to this conversation.

Now this is a situation that would merit a more in depth explanation of why you've decided to travel elsewhere. The person you've spoken with has obviously invested more than the average amount of time in getting to know you and your suitability for their program and working with them, and has connections to people already in your network (which isn't out of the ordinary, but if you're talking multiple connections. . .)

I would pow-wow with your current advisors, or whomever is writing your letters and ask them - since they seem to know these professors personally/professionally - what might best be the approach to take with each of these professors.

Agreed. Thankfully that's not what I said. . .at all.

Well then by all means, craft personalized emails for these instructors you have had these substantive conversations with who I am quite sure will remember you in 5 or 10 years.

Exactly. Perhaps people want to over complicate things because it is a big step in their life, and each action demands some grand gesture. Unless you're an exceptional candidate and the department went out of their way to recruit you (read: did they do anything they didn't do, or wont do again, to another candidate) a simple email suffices.

But hey I'm sure someone will come along and tell the OP what they want to hear: personalized hand written cards (perhaps scented) expressing deepest regrets and the hope that this doesn't completely shatter their graduate program.

There is no negative tone. It is simply me not shining you on; you asked for opinions, I gave you one which you reject out of hand which lead me to conclude you don't actually want opinions just validation for a decision you have already made. Nature of the beast.



I amended my recommendation to be more in line what you were seeking. . .did you not see?

Gradcafe and MathGre are littered with profiles of folks who were competitive; that's not in question. Whether one should hedge their bets is. The OP's competitiveness is not without question; it's obvious their academic qualifications. However, the majority of people who are going into the "To Be Reviewed" pile will have the same qualifications, and thus it is the OP's non-academic qual's that are going to set them apart.

That's just silly.

If I were teaching undergrads, I would maybe opt for jeans, a casual dress shirt and Timberlands. If I were lecturing graduate students, I'd opt for much of the same, with maybe a school t-shirt or other tee thrown in now and then.

I've had some pretty poorly dressed instructors, and some pretty top notch (roll up in suit and tie, Rolex, shined shoes. . .whole nine-yards) - never did I stop to think "This guy knows/doesn't know" what he is talking about based on what they had on.

Id wager it really all depends on the discipline.

That's just silly.

It's all going to be in that Statement of Purpose. That you simply didn't complete your grad requirements a scant few years ago is going to be quite the red flag for people reading your application. I respect that you do not feel that you are a quitter, but that is how the grad. comm. is going to see it without you successfully (and honestly) explaining what happened during your first go around. If the program was a wrong fit, explain why it was the wrong fit and why the program you are wanting to enter now is.

As for how you do this, I would steer clear of "depression" or any psychological talk, and instead couch the discussion in terms of how the lack of fit between you and the material, despite the quality of the program, lead to a disconnect and eventually you deciding to not complete the program instead of putting your name on work you didn't believe in. If any member of the faculty can speak to your talent despite you not finishing, that will be huge for you.

At the end of the day these people (and really anyone who ever "hires" you in the future) is going to want to know: Does this person know what they are doing and is in it for the long haul?

That's just silly.

I just want to say, if you look at the thread title from the front page it says:

"my phd-advisor stole my man"

I have nothing else to contribute to this conversation.

Calm down Sigaba. You didn't write the word "minefield." I read what you wrote and interpreted it as being equivalent to seeing the world as a minefield, which I thought was pretty clear. To be more explicit, I thought your post suggested that there were hidden dangers everywhere, and that by engaging in dating with fellow grad or undergrad students, you would likely screw yourself without even knowing it. I think a minefield is an apt metaphor for that.

You also did not write the phrase "Do not get involved with undergraduates." However, your entire post led to this conclusion. Sort of like a limit on its way out to infinity! We all know where it's headed.

And you also did not use the term "one night stand." Instead you talked about "short term desires." That's a very diplomatic way of saying one night stand, in this context. Unless you meant two night stands, or one semester stands? If so, I stand corrected. However, my point that people find valuable, long-term relationships amongst fellow students stands.

So now that we've talked about my apparently objectionable use of metaphor and hypoerbole, I stand by what I said. Your post portrays school as a bad place to engage in relationships, where you're likely to mess up your academic career by doing so. I think this is a bad way to view it, since people can develop very meaningful relationships this way, and approaching it full of fear of unknown hazards is going to stymie any chances of that. Adhere to rules and ethics, and don't worry about every little invisible unknown hazard, because doing that tends to be paralyzing, and close social relationships aren't something you should simply discard for five years.

They are investing in the future. As someone said, every action the student takes - it will reflect positively (assuming it is positive) back on them, and thus warrant the large grants and faculty interest they receive.

There are of course OTHER benefits, but I think its very cynical to think these "other benefits" (student labor) are what is really driving graduate committees.

And is TA'ing really that bad. I've done it and not been paid, and I would say I would rather have done it (even though yes I hated doing it) than not because it keeps you constantly engaged in the material in a different way than sitting around and debating or talking about it with your peers does.