CarlieE

Maybe this might help with your next presentation if it's accompanied with a powerpoint. I start the power point and then record what I want to say (in private). Then I play it back for myself to hear and make adjustments ie. Oh god, no. Why the **** did I say that? and re-record again - and again - and again, until I like how I sound and everything. THEN I play back the recording and I write down EXACTLY what I said including the uhms and ahhs. I don't make the script grammatically correct or anything. I just transcribe as I sound. Note I made the font LARGE. Then I play back the powerpoint presentation as I read off my script and add in marks on my script for when I click to move to the next slide. At the presentation, I have my script with my marks for slide changes. So then I basically read off my script, looking up every now and then to gauge my audience and smile or whatever. One hand holds my script, the other hand has the clicker. Since the font is MASSIVE, I never really lose my place in the script when I look up. This works really well at conferences too since the timing is very exact. They gave me 10 minutes at my last conference and by using this method I got my presentation down to 9 minutes and 43 seconds. It really helped me so I didn't get flustered or lose my thought.

This kind of like preaching to the choir. Obviously, most of us who use this forum regularly find that a "virtual" world is "real" enough to be worked into a part of our daily activities to some degree... My personal feeling is that a virtual reality is real - no quotations marks - for many of the reasons others have given above. I check in here the same way I might check in on a group lunch; only this is better since I can ignore a thread/conversation going on and just focus in on something I want to respond to. At a physical lunch meeting I would have to listen to some crap I really don't care about and have to smile or nod just to be courteous. HAH! But a lot of my friends with whom I have physical contact with (as opposed to purely mental, virtual contact with) find it a little odd and are somewhat embarrassed (for themselves) by the fact that I am so freely open about having a virtual life. There's still a lot of taboo around online sociality; there's an implication that this is a "last resort", a place for people who can't connect on a physical level.. The physical world is still the "ideal", the standard, the "norm" - even though most people DO have a facebook account and use it regularly or some other form of virtual interaction... The paradigm is shifting though I think... imagine what sociality will be 100 years from now! I'm kinda hoping one of those Online Forum NaySayers gets on this thread with a CAP LOCK post like: "YOU FORUM LOSERS! THIS IS SOOOOOO STUPID. I WOULD NEVER BE CAUGHT DEAD POSTING ON AN ONLINE FORUM - EXCEPT NOW TO POINT OUT HOW STOOPID YOU ALL ARE!" and then we can have a good laugh at the irony of it.

My first semester I presented on Nietzsche and I said.... "The idea is that there's no such thing as an absolute truth, but rather many. So it's not knowledge with a capital "N"...." There was a pause and then an eruption of laughter. Believe me, I made sure I spellchecked my final paper over and over.... I'm getting a tshirt that says "yep, theyre actually going to give me a PhD".... Ultimately, its your content that counts. If you feel badly about it I'm sure you can email our professor and ask for a do over by doing a second presentation but I wouldn't worry too much over it.

So, just to pose an alternate view... I'm 31 and in my first year of my PhD program, but five others in my cohort are in their early to mid 20s. We were gathered around, talking about the new incoming cohort for next year and it seems that our cohort was unusually young - and after asking around, the average age of all of our cohorts currently attending is about 30-32. The youngest in my cohort expressed that she actually felt she was the odd duck, being in her early 20s and expressed concerns about not having a lot of life experience etc. Of course, this isn't a MA program, but a PhD so maybe that makes a difference, but, just to pose the possibility that younger cohort-mates might be experiencing similar anxieties about THEIR age.

To our "social" event I wore a nice "dressy" pair of jeans and a bias cut knit top with long sleeves and oxfords. It was held at one of the faculty member's homes but it was catered (though not a sit down dinner party). I don't think it would hurt for you to ask about what dress is appropriate for the event.

Noise reducing earphones and a chill station on Pandora.

in my experience that part is not reimbursed. It's generally not a door-to-door type of reimbursement. I was responsible for getting to the airport, but once there it was paid for. My ride to and from the airport (in my "home" town) was not. I got around paying exorbitant taxi fares (I'm 1.5 hours away from the airport) by getting rides from a friend who travelled a lot. We traded rides so the next time he went out of town I drove him to the airport and back.

anthropologygeek - yes, I think you're right. Cultural does take longer than the other 3, generally. And IRB approval can be very sticky depending on your topic.. However, with that said, I have come across a few archaeologists who have complained that they can only work on their sites a few months out of a year and so excavation for them has taken years - or they also run into problems about property ownership and getting approval from government agencies. A few Bio/cultural people in my program are having a time getting IRB I hear as well because of the collection of bodily fluids and what not - especially if dealing with minors or other "vulnerable" populations (the ill, mothers, etc.) I'm not sure about linguistics - that might be easier! But I'm sure there are issues there too.

I think this does depend on discipline and your research, but here's my experience. In an average week I have about 1000 pages to read, 2 or 3 writing assignments (these are usually reaction papers or discussion notes), writing of other kinds (such as applications for grants/workshops/fellowships for the summer or for travel money etc; or drafts of my research proposal for my advisor or for a grant writing workshop). The writing amounts to about.... 10 - 12 pages a week, depending on what's going on. I'm not TAing or RAing so most of my day - everyday - is spent reading and writing generally.

Doing 12 months doesn't mean that the research is necessarily good. You could do 24 months of worthless research too. But the proof comes in the pudding; if you don't have verifiable data, then you don't have an approvable dissertation. Your advisors will be able to tell if you have just messed around for the last X months. It's easy to tell when someone has faked their ethnographic work because, chances are, you're not the only one in that field. And the discipline being as it is, you can't get away with making a statement about a population without someone else checking it. After all, that IS what peer review is. With that said, every discipline must have standards of some kind. Rules of thumb to measure by, not as the ONLY form of measurement but as a general starting point. In grad school, 12 months in the field is one of those rules of thumb. If a university were to start giving one student a "pass" to do only 6, then why not another? Unless you can justify that your research is going to be just as good with 6 months rather than 12, it's not a battle worth fighting. And if that's the case, then the whole point of field work - a key characteristic of anthropology - goes down the drain. And your comment about time in the field matching the person's study - we are actually coming from the same place. However, ethnography is not one of those methods in which you can just "jump in". It takes time to build organic relationships with people, to get them to trust you, to open up to you - and time for you to see beyond their performance and personal agenda (as everyone has when speaking with a (generally) foreign ethnographer). In some cases that never happens, in some it happens sooner than others; this is why 12 months is merely a standard. In the "real world" there is no such thing as 12 months or any other sort of standard; however, grad school is designed around rules and standards. That's what makes a PhD accredited. If there were no standards to live by, accreditation would not be possible and essentially, a PhD (in any field) would be worthless. A PhD or any degree has worth because we give it worth. 12 months as a standard for field work is a standard because the academy has given this number value. If the OP wants to fight for 6 months or less, that's up to them; but IMO that lowers the expectation and the credibility of a PhD in anthropology.

Why do people get down on Ugg Boots? I'm a grad and I wear them. There are just some days I can't be bothered to wear heels, or it's raining and cold and I don't want my sneakers to get wet. They're just footwear, same as anything else. And yes, even grads wear sweats. Believe me, there are days when the world is lucky I brushed my teeth before I stepped out of the house. At some point in every semester, everyone has THOSE days grad or undergrad.

My program is set up for 3 years of coursework, during which you also take your MA comps and PhD Quals. You're expected to a pilot study in year 2. Year 4 you should be off at your fieldwork site. And, ideally, in year 5 you return to write, do one course of teaching solo and - if you write well/quickly and with the approval of your committee and advisor - you could defend in year 6. Things that have slowed down the time-line may include: 1. Not getting enough funding for field work and having to go through a second season of grant applications. 2. Changing your field site out of choice or necessity ie. some areas are not politically stable, you can't get IRB approval for the group you want to study i.e. refugees, children, vulnerable populations etc. 3. You can't get enough subjects/informants/participants in your study and just need to wait it out. This can happen in bio and cultural. For instance if you're studying uterine processes and you have 4 variables you have to meet and you only have a sample size of 12 when you need 50. You either have to radically change your research or wait. Or you're studying LGBT communities and find that you are having a hard time "breaking" into the community because you're straight, or they perceive you as an outsider even after 6 months. 4. You have a hellish committee and they can't decide on what should stay in or out of your dissertation. This DOES happen and can hold back approval for defense. 5. Writing is hard. And lonely. And you might find that once you begin writing that you need to go back into the field because something is missing or you need more of something or you notice something WONDERFUL is going on and you totally missed it while you were there. There are in fact several grants which allow you to return to the field for follow up work. This may very well tack on an additional 6 months or more. Just a couple of scenarios I have seen and heard of in my current and previous UG dept.

I don't know if all of them are out yet, nor how many there'll be this year. I have no access to that kind of info, but I can share what the experience will be like. Format-wise it will be a PACKED schedule for 2 days. Last year we were put up in a hotel "on" campus (the whole compound is massive, but campus itself is small). On the first night there was no event planned since everyone arrived at different times. We each had a roommate of the same sex. The next morning we walked to the anthro building for a light breakfast and a short talk by the DGS and then immediately after got started with interviews. The night before, at the hotel, we were given a bag which had our individual itineraries and some brochures/etc. If you were cultural you interviewed with all the cultural professors, and vice versa if you were bio. Or a mix of both if you're bio-cultural. If you were bio you also got to request to visit the lab and/or other departments. I would recommend asking in advance of arriving to make sure since all the departments have their interviews around the same time. Each interview was about 25 mins long and in the office - one-on-one - with that professor. And they were back to back with about an hour break for lunch. So I had about 8 interviews that day; five in the morning and three after lunch I think. During lunch we got to meet with some of the other grad students and professors. After the interviews we walked back to the hotel or could roam campus and look at the libraries (there are 3 or 4; I just use 2) etc. In the evening some grad students came and drove us in batches over to one of the professors' homes for dinner. A LOT of people were there; past and present cohorts and all the professors. Bio and cultural were split into two dinners: so you went to the one you were best affiliated with. It was a mix and mingle kind of thing; be prepared to be CHATTY. Yes, you will be tired as **** but this is a good time to let the committee know your personality. And a good time to make friends with people you'll be working with (hopefully). The next morning we were taken by van on a driving tour of the city and area around school. Things we might be interested in, places to eat, good places to live etc. We got to ask our driver, also a grad student, about housing options such as cost of rent etc. We were driven back to the anthro building for lunch - again, more socializing with professors and other grad students. And then, we were free to leave. We walked back to the hotel, got packed and waited for the shuttle to be taken to the airport. Almost all meals were accommodated, except for dinner the first night, and breakfast the second morning. There's a new DGS this year so the format might be different, but you get the gist of the idea. If you have more questions, feel free to post them.

I can offer something on Emory interviews if anyone's interested. At least just based on my own experience from last year. PM me or leave a post in this thread.

I think it's because shoe sizes come in half sizes. LOL That's just MY reasoning!

Wow. That's a nightmare of a situation. My gut instinct would be to move out. I would also go so far as to say you should CYA even more by getting your new place set up BEFORE you put in your 30 days notice so that if your room-mate or his GF go crazy on you for moving out then you have somewhere else to go immediately. You might have to pay for an overlap of 1 month's rent, but it would be worth it IMO. PS. I'm also in Atlanta and rents here are really not bad - I mean, non-school affiliated rental communities. If you want your own place without a roommate and you have decent credit you can get a place without paying a security deposit. When you move in you just pay your first month's rent and for utility hook ups. I don't know which school you're at but regardless, if you search Emory's website they have a grad student classified site which local landlords and room-mates post up vacancies. I'm sure you could use it even if you're not an Emory student (there's no login).

6 months is considered too little because you run the risk of being empirically thin. The idea is that you actually want 12 months as a starting point, a minimum - longer if you can. Most books end up having years of data from fieldwork, accumulated over several field visits and years. (Megan Sinnot's on Thailand took 8 years; Peter Little's on Africa was an accumulation of 20 - his whole career - for example.) The dissertation is considered to be the beginning of a career long commitment, generally. Not to say that some people don't switch regions or decide to spin off in other directions later; of course, you can and people do. But the academy is set up to have the dissertation be a starting point so 12 months is the minimum. Most post-docs return to their field sites if they can and again before you publish (The Book). Part of this is because fieldwork that is over a few years old is often considered "too old" to be valid any longer and its hard to publish a paper on fieldwork that is a few years old; so if you keep going back you can keep the data "fresh", contemporary, valid etc. (A prof of mine had fieldwork from 2008 - and 2012 was REALLY her last year to publish with it. And despite interest in the topic several journals rejected it with that very complaint.) Also, it's not possible to become immersed in a new environment within a month or two realistically and then to begin the sensitive task of interviewing, participating etc. The idea is, after all, to become an expert in that culture or with that group/collective/society etc. While people HAVE published books on very little fieldwork, they do run the risk of getting very harsh criticism. Generally, advisors recommend avoiding this: you can't be criticized for having a MORE data (generally), but you can for having too little. Think of it as sample size, if you're in a quantitative field. (Also books with less empirical data tend to be theory heavy which is not recommended for grad students to attempt in dissertations since - and here is one BIG criticism I've heard - "How can one develop a theory without evidence from the ground? ie. data from fieldwork. That would be a foundational-less theory... or *gasp* an OPINION!) The "tradition" of a year (minimum) has stuck because its necessary as a way to standardize the discipline; under the same principle that data from a sample size of 50 shouldn't be extrapolated to make generalizations about an entire population (generally speaking, unless the entire population of X is maybe 100 or something like that). Just my 2 cents... well, 4 now.

I think if you mention the other scholar, your SOP might beg the question: So why aren't you applying to work with him/her? (If they are still alive and teaching). It somehow implies that the school you are applying to is interesting, but perhaps not your 1st choice (and simultaneously that the school your scholarly muse works at is your REAL first choice).

So not having gone as far as you, but being in the same field, I'll offer my 2 cents in the hopes that it might help you with your decision, and at least give you some comfort knowing that your predicament is not being ignored and is acknowledged as a real one. As fuzzylogician mentioned above, I agree that you have to ask yourself if a PhD is really what you want. However, there are ways you can still have your PhD without having to do the things (some of them) that you aren't interested in. Or you could exit with your MA and still do what you want. It boils down ultimately to what it is you want to DO with your life. With that said, here are my 2 cents: Are you focusing on Applied Anthropology? What sub-field are you in? If your track is applied then you don't have to teach, you don't have to publish. And you don't need to have your PhD. Has this been an option you and your advisor have explored? Not everyone in my program is on the academic track and that's OK with the faculty. Are you getting support in that way? It seems as though there is some kind of external pressure telling you that a PhD is the way to go. You don't address it directly in your OP, but maybe you should. What dissertation grants have you applied for? I'm in cultural and my focus is on Southeast Asia which, of course, is overseas as yours is. I'm looking at Wenner Gren (of course), and Fullbright, but also NSF and a slew of regional fellowships. (Have you looked at these regional options?http://www.aaanet.org/profdev/fellowships/) I'm also toying with the possibility of being affiliated with a local university which can also provide some funding - also, depending on where you are, you can teach with an MA at a local uni and thereby earn money for your fieldwork as you work. I know you aren't interested in teaching, but I wasn't interested in waitressing either and that helped get me through college financially. If you want your PhD and you want your fieldwork done, there ARE other ways to fund it aside from the standard grant-tract routes. Since your goal is community oriented, have you thought of programs like Kickstarter? Or other grassroots level sources of funding? You might work for an NGO as part of your research and work into the deal that they don't "pay" you but provide meals/lodging etc. That might also open up new avenues for you to express and be more active in the community you want to help/study. One other student in our program - super, super smart - hasn't gotten funding for their fieldwork either and they are in their.... 5th year I think. But he/she is now in the field, having found private funding. Where there is a will, there is a way - even if the way is more painful. I'm not saying you're not committed; I'm saying you're in a state of depression about your situation and maybe that's hindering you from seeing other possibilities. (On that note, what sort of grant writing workshops have you attended? What kind of feedback are you getting about your proposals? A lot of agencies will give you back feedback on your rejected proposal if you ask for it. Have you?) In my program there are quite a few grads who are 6-8th year and still doing their fieldwork and one who is still trying to get funding. A lot of people took time off to do an Applied sort of addendum to their PhD. Usually a MA in public health or development studies... Is this an option for you while you consider the merits of finishing your PhD? Your OP is focused on the grant issue - you open with that statement - and the fact that you don't like your project now or the academic track stuff. About your project... No one expects us to stick with the same project we came into the program with. One grad I know in bio-anth COMPLETELY switched her project in the 3rd year right before Quals. AND is doing GREAT with the change. Her advisor was super supportive about it and so has the rest of the faculty. Similarly, everyone who has come back from the field has a whole new take on the project they started with. Very few in anthropology finish with they start with. A bit of advice my advisor recently gave me about field work and funding: "This anxiety you feel - have I done enough, am I doing the right thing, etc - none of that goes away. Some of it is part of life, some of it is part of the job - it's also the risky nature of working in the field, dealing with variables that change constantly. That's anthropology." Ultimately, you have to decide if a PhD is what you really want. I hope my post helps; my intent is not confuse, berate or belittle you. Your problem is a valid one and one that I'm sure many experience with good reason.

It's all a matter of personal preference. I use my ipad to take notes - diagrams and typed notes. I use a stylus for diagrams or stick figures etc. I use Notability and dropbox. But that doesn't preclude me from using paper when it's easier. If I do I just keep them in a folder; as long as I know where all my stuff is I can find it when I need it.

This might be more field specific, but I think research of any kind is a plus on an application. They are not looking for the results of your research; they just want to know that you have done some before, that you understand the mental processes involved in thinking in research-mode. Methodology can be learnt, skills can be learnt, but the right attitude, the right mentality and psychological approach to research IMO is what is more important. On my application I listed down archaeological and linguistic UG research, but no ethnographic experience (my field is cultural and ergo, ethnographic research) but my lack wasn't a problem obviously, since I got accepted.

This has been an interesting thread... In my limited experience - having only attended one grad school - I've found that it kind of goes both ways. For instance, I'm in a private university which is top tier. In my cohort only 2 of us (out of 9) came from state universities; everyone else came from private (and expensive) private universities. Some of the kids definitely have wealthy and professional parents; some of us have middle-class to aspiring mid-upper class parents. But no one acts the brat and in fact, the more "privileged" ones tend to want to position themselves in the middle class to avoid the stereotype of the spoilt rich brat. Say, take me for example: I went to a private secondary school overseas (but I got to attend it because my mom worked in the school library and got a significant break on my tuition), I got to travel a lot as a kid (because my dad's job moved us around a lot and because my mom likes to do the touristy thing). In UG I went on 2 study abroads and visited London (I got grants for my SA programs and paid for it with financial aid money). I paid my way through my UG myself and with financial aid money. I have a stipend and I am making more money now than I did during my UG. I have splurged on fancy food and shows. I went to see Cirque de Soleil over the break. But I also eat ramen noodles and baked beans at home. Spending habits are performative; people let you see what they want you to see. That said, grad school is a luxury that many cannot have (not afford, but have): not everyone academically qualifies, not everyone who qualifies gets accepted. There is an elitism about grad school that goes beyond money and it may be that sense of exclusivity that is being (mis?)understood here as "privilege". Just a possibility...

I got kind of the same thing. After I got my interview letter, my POI emailed me and asked if I had time for an informal chat, to go over any concerns I had about the interview weekend etc. We talked for about an hour and half - about my research, about his research, about my academic history and his, the university, the program - actually all kinds of stuff. He asked if I had questions about the interview and he told me what to kind of expect, not to worry too much about impressing people, to be myself etc. It was kinda like an encouragement chat. It was really nice and very comforting. Of course, that may or may not be the case with your POI but thought you might get something out of my experience.

4- 4.5 My first semester, this past Fall, was the WORST semester I have ever had in my college career. But it was not because of the program; it was because I was suffering from Imposter syndrome and a serious lack of self-confidence. There was a lot of work, a lot of reading, but I think I handled it pretty well. And though it was hard and I was all over the place emotionally, I think I learnt a lot. The program has been GREAT. Very supportive. The faculty and staff are very responsive, very encouraging and have always been around to offer help and answer questions. My cohort and the cohorts ahead of us have been extremely welcoming and we have mixed socials. My cohort has gotten along really well, despite personality clashes and differences - always happens, no matter where you are - and we've developed a good non-competitive kind of camaraderie. The city is wonderful. I'm in a big metropolitan city in the south where it is WARM! And there is plenty of nightlife, food, entertainment etc. My advisor is on sabbatical but he has kept in touch with me and his other student here: met up with us regularly, kept in email contact and even now, though he is officially on leave, is doing an independent reading course with us. I couldn't have asked for more support. I am really looking forward to this semester.

While I sympathize with the frustration - having gone through it and mind you, still AM going through it since I'm applying for other grants/fellowships - I think it's a bit harsh to expect an immediate letter. It does take time to write one and these are still professional people with busy lives. Keep in mind they are still teaching, doing research, returning emails to other people and so on. Giving a recommender 2 or 3 months time to submit a letter is very generous, 1 month is still good - PROVIDED that the person asking for letter also gives the recommender all the material he or she needs to write a letter. You can't just ask for one and then leave it at that; you have to provide your recommenders with your CV, with a copy of your personal statement, your research ideas so they can say something about you, more than "Yes, he/she was a good student in my class" or "he/she is a hard worker". Of course, in some cases, some recommenders display disturbing unprofessionalism but, quite simply there is nothing you can do about people like that. They will be every where. CYA and make sure you ask a LOT of people; then you give yourself a bit of peace of mind. If you can ask one, why not 2 or 3 or 4. The worst thing someone will say is No.