giacomo

On a more casual note, I'm developing an inferiority complex because I didn't even know what impostor syndrome meant before reading this thread.

Awesome. I mean, @jacib's posts are. Not the adjunct pays.

has everyone received a decision one way or another?

@sciencegirl or those in the know: how much does a full-time teaching job make at a non-top R1 (lower R1, non-R1, LAC, CC, etc.)?

YAY! Congrats, avee! What happens to our smoothie stand plans now?!

Yeah, I guess things like that frequently happen, but my concern was, though, more toward those who haven't heard anything from the programs that have done all three in the last couple of months -- have accepted, rejected, and waitlisted at least some applicants.

I think the OP meant extra money for living. At least, that's my understanding.

availability of local brews

seriously, what's with the schools that still don't accept, reject, or waitlist us.

i guess i'll ask my fellow posters for letters.

I was always wondering why book chapters were not high in the publication hierarchy. What exactly is the logic behind this? Book chapters usually don't contain terribly important original research because if the research had been that important, it would've been published in a journal, etc.? Aren't many book chapters actually slightly revised versions of previously published journal articles?

This.

i might be wrong, but what constitutes "research experience" or "original research" seems to be quite different from poster to poster in this thread and on this board in general. Can someone -- the more the better, i guess -- explain how they might define research experience and original research at this stage (pre- and post-application) of their careers? Also, is there ever a clear difference between theoretical work and empirical work? At this point of human history, how can any acceptable piece of scholarship either be just theoretical or just empirical?

come on! you need to tell us more about the awkwardness!

no wonder some--many--seemingly great young scholars never get to become tenured profs.

whoa, is this true?

*squeezes self into @quantitative's luggage* *gets to see Europe*

I have long given up on doing anything remotely close to it.

Re: #2, i get the first part but not the second. why would they not need many PhD program graduates? placement issue, probably?

Thank you for your insights. What's your take on the following, though? As you have pointed out, I, too, hear time and time again (from friends and here) that grad students from public schools (who are already in the program) fiercely compete for the few available funding sources, but if you see their programs' websites, they usually say something in the line of "all admitted students are guaranteed 5 years of funding, etc.etc." What gives?

just to clarify, you mean those who were not guaranteed to receive funding for, say, 5 years when they were accepted to the programs, correct?

Can you please expand on this? I'm not talking about the students who are already in the programs but those who just got accepted but are on the funding waitlist. At this point of the process (i mean, after the actual admissions process), could they even tell or care who really are "good students"? Isn't the admissions process itself enough of a "weeding out" process?

We refuse to believe that, Karlito! *goes back to refreshing email furiously* Wait, did I apply to Yale?

So, how realistic is it to get off the "funding" waitlist (in comparison with, say, getting off the admissions waitlist? does anyone have a success story or general knowledge to share on this issue? (or should I start a thread of its own?)