jenjenjen

The efficiency apartments are not bad, but lack any sort of living room. The regular two bedroom apartments have a separate living space in which you could have a few people over, eat your meals in, or study in if you wanted a change of environment. Basically enough room for a small couch, table, maybe a few chairs. The efficiency apartments have a kitchen and a counter you could probably squeeze two stools at, and then a skinny hallway leading directly to the bedrooms/bathrooms. So the downside is... if you ever want another person over they will be socializing in your bedroom aaand there's not really like a casual space to just "live."

Blah still haven't heard anything from Duke... hopefully it'll be soon, even if it's a rejection at least I'll know :/

So this might sound kind of strange but I often use "progressive muscle relaxation" to help combat anxiety with public speaking like things. You should be able to google it, and it's a technique often used to reduce physical responses to stress. It involves a whole process of tightening and releasing specific muscles while focusing of the buildup and release of tension, plus deep relaxing breathing. I use it to help fall asleep on occasion butttt I've realized that after "practicing" it a bit, I can go through a few of the steps in public and calm myself down. I usually get super hot, red, and shaky when nervous but before i have to speak, if I focus on deep breathing, and clenching and releasing my foot/calf/etc muscles I can reduce my stress response. It's not like a magic cure but it does help! Or you might be able to find something similar that works for you (such as using visualizing meditation at home, and then doing a quick 2 minute meditation before entering a stressful situation). Sorry if that sounds hokey or whatever haha.

Haha i was loathe to chime in seeing as everyone else took such a professional approach to facebook, but mine, too, is pretty terrible. While I have high protections on, I also have about 800 friends and 2000 photos tagged of me. And while you'd have to be rather committed to search past all the photos of me travelling, graduating, and posing in the "sorority squat," I'm sure there are some in there in which I am clearly less than sober. Or dressed up for the unfortunately misogynistic and even boderline racist themed fraternity parties (think cowboys and indians, not black face). Also lots where I'm in a swimsuit... ugh I'm going through it now. And while I don't post anything one would be easily offended by, it's pretty easy to tell I'm of the liberal persuasion. But no off color jokes or the like... Basically I think I would come off as fairly juvenile. And ridiculous. But when this was gradually being created over my highschool/undergrad days I WAS juvenile and ridiculous. And I kinda enjoyed it. So I don't really want to take it all down, and it's still my best way of keeping in touch with quite a large number of people. That being said, I don't friend faculty, older grad students, nor students of my own. But due to the whole 800 friends and all their friends-of-friends, it's probably not as private as I'd like to think. Sigh... well at least you all have given me some impetus to prune my friends list and perhaps clean up my photos from freshman year.

Yeah i would try and get in contact with a grad student at the school you are visiting, if possible. I would say I was "overdressed" at my last visit to UW - and i was wearing a value village sweater dress, leggings, and low heeled ankle boots. The next day i wore grey boot cut corduroys, red shoes, and a (niceish) white t-shirt and I felt more on standard. I think slacks or serious heels would have been out of place at this visit, but it may well vary from school to school. Generally it seemed like there were far more grad students in jeans than prospective students in jeans...

I didn't contact any professors before application time (some schools actually discourage it) but still wanted to sound knowledgeable about the schools to which I was applying. So I sort of edged around the issue by saying something along the lines of "At XYZ University, I am especially intrigued by the work of Drs. ABC and DEF and would relish the opportunity to learn and work in the same environment." So I wasn't entirely saying that I absolutely wanted to work with John Smith, but that I was aware of the faculty whose interests align with my own.

Huh I kinda disagree with that, though I could just be getting defensive haha. For one of the undergraduate journal I published in I had to do a great deal of work in the "revise and resubmit" process that gave me a great introduction to the entire publication process. It went through the whole blind peer review process from two grad students at separate universities, and then onto a faculty member at Stanford (intimidating!) who gave me some of the best writing advice of my life. I went through multiple drafts before it even cleared him to go on to the copy editor, who proceeded to tear my punctuation apart. While I'm not defending the journal as the height of fabulous writing, it is used by a fair number of undergrad profs in rhetoric at a teaching tool. Admittedly I also had an article published in an internal school publication that required a fraction of that effort and probably is not read by anyone but faculty at my one university haha. Okay kind of long winded but my point is that for some an ug publication can show that you have put some effort into taking your work beyond just submitting for a class final, and that you can work towards improvement based on outside commentary. I don't think it will look ridiculous to any adcom, even if it doesn't help your application that much.

Soooo this might be a dumb question, but how do you know when/if a prof is tenured? Is it just the difference between an assistant vs associate prof, something in their CV? Sigh..

Sad... but good to know haha

27K is def a high one. I don't know what's 'average' but Washington offered me just under 14K, which is based on a unionized TA salary. Private schools will generally be higher than public (though you can help bump up your stipend with outside grants). And you of course need to take into cost of living, so a medium stipend at a rural school might be worth more than a larger one from an expensive city.

Not sure if different disciplines have different requirements, but I was accepted to a handful of sociology phds and neither writing sample I used was strictly sociological. I had one paper in religion and one in rhetorical studies; both had been published in undergraduate humanities journals. Sooo not even social science. BUT I consider them my best writing (esp one but it was too long for some page limits) and they certainly show my ability to make an argument, support it, and fit it into the existing base of knowledge. And they both were related to my interests within sociology - namely race and social movements. I'd run this question by a few faculty if you can, but in general I think the point of the writing sample is to prove you can write, and not to prove your knowledge in a certain area. That being said, you better be sure your SOP shows you understand the language of your field and explicates what kind of research you want to do, and why you want to do it at XYZ University.

My first visiting 'weekend' is this Friday and Saturday! I really appreciate the advice that has been given thus far. And, unless i'm sworn into some super secret society upon entrance to the campus, I'll give a general rundown on how it was run and my general impressions. Maybe I'll even have some insight slash advice for future visits!

Smile mysteriously and say "don't fret, you are my first choice" ? That's probably how I'd handle it haha

There's also a possibility you have already been 'deemed rehabilitated' if five years have passed since you completed your sentence (which, as I understand it, includes the length of license suspension so you'll be cutting it close.) Most US misdemeanors, even gross misdemeanors, are automatically deemed rehabilitated in 5-10 years after sentence completion. Though it would depend on your actual conviction (increased time if you blew over a .15 or were involved in an accident etc). It might be unlikely you have this option available if you have a couple of misdemeanors though... If you want applying for individual rehabilitation, which is probably your best option, start TODAY because there is a long waiting period. You may be able to speed this up my paying an expedited fee or something... But you will again be asked to give details regarding the initial offense, proof you completed all sentences (including any suggested treatment/education), and three letter from 'responsible citizens' verifying that you are now the type of person they should let into Canada. Also the general fee for applying for this can be up to $1000. GOOD LUCK!

i'd like to second that question. but also was really hoping that like corduroys or khakis and not-sneakers would be formal enough. all my slacks are tailored to heels and man do i not want to wear heels...

THIS ONE. But then I also feel like it's a mistaken thing to be so anxious about, and it's hard for me to even talk about without sounding like I'm doing that self-deprecating bragging thing: "God it's so tough that people love me so much." I know two (but especially one) of my letter writers think the world of me and believe that the greatest schools around should be fighting over me, and probably said as much in their letters. Butttt a part of me just sort of feels like I charmed them into giving me more opportunities than most people, and tricked them into thinking I am smarter than I really am. And then I assume I won't actually be able to cut it in a phd program and I will simultaneously make myself and my mentors look like idiots. Not that they probably actually *care* that much - even though they each wanted me to go into academia (in their respective, different fields) if I joined the peace corps or even just backpacked around the world for a few years my mentors would likely be supportive of whatever made me happy. So I'm probably stressing about nothing on that front. I can't decide if it's worth to have people expect you to accomplish a ton or don't expect you to accomplish anything. Same thing for self expectations. Ughhh.

unfortunately i could easily see my undergraduate university attempting to do this. *shudder*

Word thanks guys. I guess I'll try and rediscover some patience...

Hey guys, I was wondering if there were some definite dos and don'ts if I wanted to send out a few emails to the schools I haven't heard from yet. I've had no word from Duke, Michigan, or Yale, so I'm assuming all these are rejections. Buuuut I'd really like to have a notification of rejection in my hand (inbox) just so I can firmly put these schools behind me and focus on my next steps. I don't want to come off as overly pushy or like I'm making assumptions though. Anyone want to shoot me an example of something that worked for them? Or do you all think I should just keep quiet and wait it out?

haha got that one too. had to read it twice to ensure that it really was a strange rejection

hahahaha my first cd was spice girls too! But my dad had to "burn" it onto a casette for me so i could listen to it on my walkman...

I don't think you should worry about it. I'm in sociology, not anthro, but my scores were very similar: 158 quant, 167 verbal, 4.5 writing. I've been accepted to more than one top-10 program. I think if you have other evidence you can write well (statement of purpose, writing sample) then it is not worth retaking the test.

Finally someone who says graduate school is going to be fun!

Article by Lovitts about the same issue if you don't want to read the book: http://ehrweb.aaas.o.../6/context.html Or to super simplify: it's about how integrated the students are into their departmental communities. The only measurable difference between completers and noncompleters that is visible *during their first year* is knowledge about their program, and graduate school in general. (Though women drop out more than men, American students more than international, and students in the humanities most, then social sciences, then hard sciences.) So it sin't about having more research experience or taking certain courses in undergraduate. Aaaand is not a problem that can be fixed by choosing "better" students. The problem is not in admissions. So looking beyond the incoming statistics, it's basically about how the level of both academic and social integration. "Academic integration develops through formal interactions between and among graduate students and faculty as they work together on common tasks to achieve the primary goals of graduate education: intellectual and professional development. Social integration develops through informal, casual interactions between and among graduate students and faculty outside the classroom." So sciences often do better with this because the departments are super structured and people are, to a certain extent, all doing the same thing. Plus you generally have an academic advisor by the end of your first year and you work on his project throughout your entire time in grad school. But if you are in a non-lab social science or the humanities, and basically conducting research in isolation, it's not so good for the snuggly bonding time. So in these disciplines those that complete their degree are more likely to participate in brown bag lunches, holiday parties, monthly pub nights - slash be part of departments that try to arrange such things. Even only giving students group offices, instead of individual, or even making everyone's mail box in the same place, can be helpful in student retention

I'd like to second (third? fourth?) the idea of applying to a large number of schools. But I don't even necessarily mean a variety of rankings; if you are highly qualified and want to go to a top-15 school, you should apply to every top-15 school that fits your interests. I realize that is a huge time and money commitment, but I think it's worth it in the long run if you can possibly swing it. I applied to 9 schools, all in the top-15 or 20, and my advisors were even pushing more ("why did you write off Madison; I think you should take another look at Chapel Hill.") I naively assumed at UW Seattle and UT Austin could be considered more "safety schools" as my test scores and GPA were above their average. I also thought I'd have great chances at Duke, because my undergrad university sends several students there each year, and I have worked a lot with the Duke Endowment. Well Texas was my first reply, a disheartening rejection, and Duke (along with several other schools) looks like I'm on the slow list of rejections at this point. And yet I've been accepted to Stanford and Berkeley, which I considered rather long shots. The point being, it's a bit of a crapshoot. You can't assume that just because are qualified you'll get in where you expect. But a rejection also doesn't mean you aren't qualified. I know someone who was rejected from Washington but accepted to both Harvard and Columbia. What I would hate to see is someone applying to two top-10 schools and a couple lower-ranked backups that they can be sure they can get into but aren't that enthused about. Be realistic about your possibilities of acceptance to top programs, but if your professors think you are qualified, then cast your seeds widely at a large number of schools you would be thrilled to attend, and hope something takes hold. And keep you head up if you get some bad news