Nerd_For_Life

Depends on the school for sure. My experience with two dif grad school for my MA and PhD in Canada (social sciences) is that if the program is funding you they will offer you a 'funding package.' This package will often amount to enough money to pay for tuition and then some for living expenses (often called a 'stipend'). Even when the term 'tuition+fee waiver' is used it often just means that your funding will be enough to cover tuition+fees and then you will have X amount left over for living expenses. These packages are often the result of funding gathered from a wide variety of places, including the department itself, the faculty of graduate studies, and the CUPE union that TAs are apart of. Pretty much all funding packages have a teaching assistantship or research assistantship built into them as well, so part of your funding comes from you working as a well paid TA. You may also receive an entrance scholarship and be able to apply for further bursaries and scholarships both internally and externally. Many programs do not advertise the funding they will offer on their departmental website because doing so means that they are contractually bound to guarantee that amount of minimum funding. This leaves them with little flexibility and, as such, is seen as unappealing. Instead, you receive a funding letter with or shortly after you receive a letter of offer and that is what you are contractually guaranteed.

1) Write every day. Set aside a dedicated block of time for writing. Turn off the internet, your phone, the TV, etc. during that time and just write.
2) Break down what you need to do into the smallest tasks possible. If you need to say, write the introductory chapter, break that down into each of its components. And then break those components/sections into subsections. 
3) Write with a goal in mind. That could be finishing one of those subsections, writing a certain number of words, etc. 
4) Take at least one day a week where you don't write or even look at the dissertation. 

Bring water to drink. Try not to do the interview in a place with a lot of background noise. Listen to your early interviews before doing more so you can get a sense of what you sound like to the interviewee (also, this tends to lead to talking less and letting the person you're interviewing talk more). I've used Sony IC recorders in the past but am in the market for something different. I'm curious to know what others use.

Take post-baccalaureate classes somewhere and do well in them. It won't boost your GPA but it will show that you are capable of doing undergraduate work. Then, after you've done well in several upper-level anthro classes, try to take a graduate course and excel in that. Again, it won't erase your GPA from college but it will show people that you can do the work. Taking these additional classes will also give you a chance to get strong letters of recommendation, which you'll need to get in to a graduate program.
 
It sounds like your undergrad college may not be the best place for you to return to given all the issues you had there. Are there any other nearby colleges you could attend? Or, if you're planning to move for work, perhaps you could find a college/university nearby where you could take some anthropology classes in the evening.
 
Good luck! It IS definitely possible, as the "sub-3.0 GPA" thread on this forum shows.

I don't think it's particularly harsh. Grading in graduate school is very different - As are expected, Bs are okay but often a sign that your work isn't up to the expected standard, and very often Cs are a sign that you failed the class. A 2.98 indicates mostly Bs with some Cs, which is not an acceptable level of achievement in a PhD program.

Did you go to disability services? You have to actually go to disability services and disclose your disability in order to get the help. It's not illegal for universities to not accommodate you if they don't even know you have the disability; it's only illegal for them to refuse to accommodate you once they know about it.
 
With that said, I agree that you should try the appeal, particularly if your program director is on board - but I also think that your approach needs to be a bit different than evidenced here in your posts. It shouldn't be about how a 3.0 is an arbitrary dividing line (it isn't - it's pretty standard) or how you shouldn't be held accountable for MBA-level classes (why shouldn't you?) The focus should be on your personal health issues that made it difficult for you to achieve to your full potential, but those health issues are handled/you are seeking support with disability services to get accommodations for them, so now you can perform to expected levels.
 
Good luck.

I'd love to see a similar thread started here and hope this one picks up

Hi Letter Writer!
 
I just thought I'd send you a quick text to let you know that your letter is due on Tuesday! I don't know if you've gotten my three previous emails about it, since you've never responded to any of them! I do know that you haven't turned your letter in yet though, because I've gotten emails from the school telling me they've gotten everybody else's but not yours! How you uh, how you comin' on that letter you're working on? Huh? Gotta a big, uh, big stack of papers there? Gotta, gotta nice little letter you're working on there? Your big letter you've been working on for 2 months? Huh? Gotta, gotta compelling recommendation of me as a prospective doctoral student? Yeah? Gotta description of some obstacles I've overcome? Huh? Gotta recommendation brewing there? Working on, working on that for quite some time? Huh? Yea, talking about that 2 months ago. Been working on that the whole time? Nice little narrative? Beginning, middle, and end? Some friends become enemies, some enemies become friends? At the end your recommendee is richer from the experience? Yeah? Yeah? No, no, you deserve some time off. 

Hello all!
 
I thought I would inject an element of humor into this awful process and start a thread about the logistical/technological blunders we encounter while applying to these programs. Other than being a place to vent, it could also end up being helpful to people who encounter the same issues. I'm pretty sure Ohio State is the earliest deadline (for fellowship consideration), so I'll just share what I've experienced. Good luck out there!
 
The Ohio State Blunders:
 
1. Scans of official transcripts must be uploaded!
          No problem! I'm well prepared, so I've already made PDF files of these guys. Except that they want scans of the front AND BACK of each page. And of course I don't have those, or the originals anymore, so it becomes a two-day errand of going to my old schools and buying a whole new set of transcripts.
 
2. List previous schools and upload transcripts!
          Ok, front and back pages scanned, transcripts uploaded....application won't save. Fine, I don't need you to save, I'll just submit...application won't submit. Error messages that reveal nothing about the actual source of error. Through a two hour process of trial and error I finally figure out that if you went to the same school for your MA and your BA, and you list them separately, you break The Ohio State. So you have to list your start date for undergrad and your end date for grad school, making it look like you've been in the same school continuously for the past decade or so. Not a good look, but that's cool, at least the application saves now.
 
3. Upload your statement of purpose!
          Don't look for the "Upload statement of purpose" button though, because you won't find it. What you'll find is a request for your "autobiography", that should be three pages long. What you'll need to keep in mind, however, is that buried deep within the Anthropology pages is zero mention of an autobiography, but a requirement that you upload a statement of purpose that is two pages long, max. You will default to the anthropology request, and take your chances. 
          So you upload your statement and then decide you want to make a few last minute changes, now that you've figured out that whole transcript debacle. Well good f&c%i#@ luck, because when you click on the trashcan icon to delete it, nothing will happen. You will click it again and nothing will happen. You will exclaim, violently, and then decide that you know what?, it's fine. I don't need to make any changes after all, it's fine. So you'll hit submit. Error message! You must attach an autobiography!
          A cold sense of dread will spread throughout your body. But....it's there! You will say, as you point to name of the attached file that you tried, unsuccessfully to delete. So you click on the icon of the paper with the glasses superimposed over it to take a look. File missing or deleted! It will tell you. Your statement will now be Schrodinger's SOP, as it both has and has not been deleted. There's nothing there, and yet because "something is there", you can't upload anything new.
          You will walk away for a little while, hoping that it's a temporary problem. You will come back to exactly the same problem. You will continue trying for an hour until you remember The IT Crowd, and metaphorically, "turn it off and turn it on again".
 
4. Create new user log in and do the whole damn application again!
          Drop one letter from your previous username, triple check every document before uploading, acknowledge that you have spent the past four and a half hours essentially doing two tasks, hit submit and then just WALK AWAY. 

I have not experienced this before. I do know others who have supervisors that are like this though. I don't think it's a bad thing that you don't want constant supervision but I don't think it's inherently bad that the professor wants to manage his lab in this manner either. The problem is that your styles do not match well! Here are some things you might consider trying:
 
1. Have an honest and polite conversation with your advisor about how you feel when you are constantly checked up on.
 
2. Don't change your working habits, and just deliver the reports as requested (i.e. don't let the frequency of report affect your work). Every morning, just deliver the exact same report as you gave the previous evening. Make it clear that when you are closing for the day, you are closing and not working any more. 
 
3. Change supervisors.
 
4. Adjust your work habits to work with this style of management.
 
My friends in a similar situation as yours have done all 4 of these things. #1 doesn't seem to work well (i.e. it doesn't change anything) but it's usually a good first step. After all, the PI has the prerogative to manage his/her lab the way they want.
 
#2 works the best for the specific professor I'm thinking of. This professor wants their students to work a certain way and so they apply pressure to do so. Sometimes it works and the professor gets what they want (i.e. case #4). But other times, the students make it clear that they don't want to change and if the student is stubborn and firm, the professor relents and basically stops asking for the morning report since it provides no new information (i.e. case #2). Finally, a few students end up just working for someone else (case #3) if they don't want this type of conflict in their life.

This is definitely true. I'm in my first semester so I don't have my own research yet, but I certainly think about what I'm reading and writing for class at all hours of the day...when I'm on a walk in the woods, when I'm at the gym, when I'm in the shower, when I'm making dinner, etc. The fact that my intellectual interests make there way into my life outside the classroom/library doesn't bother me at all...that's what attracted me to academia originally. I guess the problem that I'm encountering is when to say "I've read enough" or "I've written enough" and do something for myself that's entirely unrelated to my work.

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!

I am not sure what field you are in but I think most conferences in the US do not have debates at the conference. In fact, at least in my field, strong disagreement is frowned upon and considered rude or tactless. For example, sometimes you will be in a session where there will be person who is very aggressive with their questions and will "attack" the speakers who present research they do not agree with. When this happens, everyone is uncomfortable, and usually the "attacker" looks bad. So, I would say "debating" is really not appropriate at an American conference, unless I misunderstand what you mean by "debate".
 
Many big American conferences have websites which might also have information for first time attendees. For example, what to wear, how to talk to people, other "unwritten" rules etc.
 
But here is a few "unwritten rules" type of things that I have noticed from American conferences in my field:
 
1. Talks are very very short--usually only 5 minutes for the presentation and then 3 minutes of questions before moving on to the next person. So, be a gracious question asker. Do not use up all 3 minutes of the question time by asking one question after another. Also, unless no one else is asking questions, make sure other people have chances to ask questions too, don't be the person that asks a question every single talk.
 
2. The question period is not the right place to tell someone they are wrong or attack their research. Remember, it's only a 5 minute talk so some details are definitely omitted. Also, it might be hard for the presenter to think up a good defense on the spot. So, the right time to raise serious doubts or concerns is to do so privately during the breaks or some other time. This is not to say that you can ask more simple questions like "how did you know that assumption X is true?" etc. but you should not ask something like "Have you read the papers by A, B and C where they say this entire method is all wrong??"
 
3. The question period is also not the right time to "self-promote". This will happen and it's annoying but some people won't really ask questions but will raise their hands to say something like "Do you know about X?" where X is their own project that is only very loosely related to the topic at hand. Even worse, some "questioners" might raise their hand and then instead of addressing a question to the speaker, they will just address the audience and say something about their own work instead!
 
4. Something other than talks/questions: try not to corner anyone during the breaks or between sessions. It's great to meet new people by walking up to them and saying hi and talk about something relevant, but try to always make it easy/possible for the other person to end the conversation and move on to other people. This is mostly recognizing when a quick chat is over and it's time to continue to circulate the room to find more people to meet. 

Note: Undergrad rankings =/= graduate program rankings
 
Edited to note that at the graduate level, rankings vary wildly by field.  A somewhat extreme example - in my field, there are no ivies that even offer my area at the doctoral level.  The brand name matters much less than the connections you make and the work you do.

In undergrad, I did mediocre....I had very strong semesters and other not so strong. I was undergoing depression. Now I'm in a PhD program at UCSD and quite frankly I'm embarrassed. I really did not want to start school again after undergrad...I honestly need a break. I graduated from an Ivy League and am deep in debt.
I am embarrassed to be attending UCSD quite frankly. UCSD ranks number 15 or so in my field ...name and prestige really matters. And I went to an Ivy League school that people don't recognize the name of (hint: it's been consistently ranked 4th in US news after Yale) on the west coast. It annoys me because people know about Stanford but my school was ranked just as high, if not better, yet people on the west coast are unfamiliar with it.
My undergrad grades weren't terrible, however, I am going to get straight As in graduate school and quit after I get my masters...it should only take me one year and a quarter.
After that I want to go to an Ivy, MIT, Stanford or Berkeley.
 
I honestly won't be happy unless I graduate from a top school.
People's ignorance about Columbia annoys me...it's an Ivy League school for Christ's sake.
But I remember someone on the west coast saying, "Columbia's the most expensive school? I don't get it..it's not Harvard or anything." I was just too dumbfounded to say anything. And my sibling goes to Harvard and everyone knows about Harvard and it's annoying when I see the reaction when I say my sibling goes to Harvard and people have no reaction about Columbia because they don't realize it's one of the top schools in the country. I love NYC and I wouldn't trade my years there for anything in the world but I'm tired of not being good enough, I know I'm capable.

Hurray, the first installment was finally deposited in my account (the day after I submitted borrowed monies to ensure I was't charged a late penalty). Now to wait for everything to be sorted out and a a cheque to arrive in the mail

Your university should have subscriptions to the relevant journals in your field.
 
As for travel, this is something you should have probably inquired about before accepting your admissions offer, but in general travel funding is completely at the discretion of the program you attend. Most programs have some kind of travel funding they assign to students but the amount and structure of the funding can vary greatly. Common structures include: (a) everything is covered by your PI always (common in rich science fields with lots of grant money); (b ) you are allotted a certain amount of money for travel that you can use at your discretion (amounts vary greatly, and you need to use it wisely so you still have money to travel in later years right before you go on the job market). (c ) you can receive at most X amount of dollars per year, sometimes at your discretion, sometimes only for a single trip so even if you don't use the whole amount on one trip, you can't use it later that year for another trip. (d) you need to apply to some university-central fund that may choose to fund you, at its discretion. You normally need to apply before traveling, or if you do it afterwards there is a chance you won't get reimbursed. (e) there is little or no funding. You need to apply for external funding for each and every trip. 
 
Grad students often need to find ways to reduce the cost of travel because, unless you're very lucky, funding is limited and you need to watch your spending. If the issue is going from NYC to DC, you're in luck. That's usually doable. You take the bus, you find a way to crash with a grad student (email the conference organizers about this, it almost always works out!) or you share a cheap room with another student, you eat frugally. It's still expensive, so there is a limit to how much you can do this, but it's much better than needing to go to the West Coast or Europe.
 
Also -- note that I deleted the post you made in another Grad School Life subforum. There is no need to cross-post the same question multiple times.

I have taken longer papers and turned them into conference presentations, although I'm in a different field than yours (English lit) so YMMV with regard to my advice. It's not a huge issue to not "re-write" the whole paper, but that's pretty much what I had to do with mine because of time constraints. The thesis/thoughts are the same, but since writing and presenting are so different, it inevitably requires a different rhetorical approach to suit the situation. 
 
The first real question I would have for you is what are the time constraints this presentation is operating under? Generally conferences limit you to 15-20 minutes, and if that's the case you've still got a pretty long way to go. A 15 minute presentation is about 7-8 double-spaced pages since most people can read/deliver a page in about two minutes.
 
The second question is what can you eliminate as ancillary? What will your audience generally know since they share your field? Your paper may be theory heavy, but since your audience is high-level, you may not have to delve as deeply into it as you think. What is your core argument? I think you've already identified one ancillary argument that can be left out of the presentation. That's good. Most of your work is going to require stripping away ancillary material, which is never easy because we are emotionally invested in our work and our writing. Faulkner said "In writing, you must kill all your darlings" and I've never found that more true than when reworking a paper. You've got to recognize that you love it, then recognize that it doesn't work for what you need in its current form, then kill it and bring it back to life as something else. 
 
When I have taken longer papers and reworked them for conferences, I've always started by writing an abstract. Most literature conferences require them for the proposal anyway, so I've found them a good place to start. Sell your paper to yourself in 200 words. That way you're working from something small, rather than looking at this daunting 30 page document that you have to cut by 75%. The abstract boils down your paper to its core argument. Then it's easier to build it back up.
 
After I've got the abstract, I ask myself what is the essential information that forms the linchpin. I jot down a few notes/quick list of what these areas/sections are. What absolutely, positively cannot be cut? Open a new document on your computer, and put the new abstract at the top. Then copy and paste the key paragraphs from those indispensable sections from the old paper into the new presentation. This will look rough, but it will give you a place to start. The challenge then becomes fitting these sections together by filling in the gaps, but at least with this method you've stripped away most of the 30-page paper, distilled it to its core essence and into something that you can start to refashion into your final presentation.
 
Also, don't be too worried about presenting in front of the "home crowd." It will be worth it because, in the end, whatever questions you might get can be used to strengthen your presentation before you ultimately deliver it at the conference. I recommend taking a legal pad and pen up with you so that you can jot down questions and notes for later. When I've done dry runs with faculty, they've always been very gracious, helpful and thought provoking. No one expects you to be as good as a professor with tenure. They know you're a grad student just starting out, and they appreciate that you're taking your first halting steps into professionalization. It is natural to be self-conscious about presenting, but I wouldn't worry too much about running a draft past faculty. They're there to help you, not to put you in front of a firing squad.
 
Good luck refashioning your paper! I'm sure you'll be great.

I'm not a postdoc but I don't think that really matters for what I have to say -- what you describe sounds like inappropriate behavior on the part of your PI. As you say, in terms of being competitive for jobs, you really need these publications. And in terms of the work, it sounds like you deserve the first authorship. The fact that authorship is not discussed at the appropriate time (at the beginning of the project), that it's effectively taken from you in this backhanded way, that your advisor is not letting you get the experience and credentials you need (and deserve!) and that she is threatening you in case you complain, all don't sound good. I worry that with this kind of relationship with your advisor, you also can't expect a very strong letter from her for job applications. What's sure, though, is that if you get into a head-on clash with your advisor, it'll hurt your letter. 
 
I think this is something you need to address because something needs to change. If you have a trusted professor or other mentor in the department, you could try and consult them about the best course of action in your department. Otherwise, I might seek the advice of an ombudsperson before I file any official complaint with the department. The crucial question is how you might expect the department head to treat your complaint; if this professor is tenured (and it sounds like she is) then she will stay long after you leave and everyone needs to get along. This is probably not the first time this has happened either. They may choose to sacrifice you in order to maintain a good relationship with her. I'd watch my step there. 

This is definitely field-specific and also depends on where you're seeking employment. A number of TT jobs I applied for this year asked for a teaching portfolio, evidence of teaching excellence or effectiveness, or copies of teaching evaluations along with my application, before or after a phone interview, and prior to a campus interview. While it may not help a great deal, it can definitely hurt an applicant, especially if the evals you get aren't very good and there are other applicants with better evals you're being compared to.
 
As for actual advice, I'll start with the following:
- Figure out what resources are available to you as a TA or instructor in your department, in your college, and through the university's teaching center. And then take advantage of them. My PhD university's teaching center flat-out told me that I was one of three grad students from my department (90 grad students) they had ever met with or assisted. Now part of this was due to my department's culture where consulting the teaching center was seen as an admission of failure but that's BS and you should ignore that if people are saying it.
- When in doubt, consult the internet. By which I mean, if you have to create a syllabus, google around to see syllabi others have created for that course or a similar course. If you're looking for appropriate wording for a policy, again you can consult the internet (though you may want to consult your peers and department first because some stuff is university-specific and/or university mandated). Looking for an assignment idea? Google it. Sample rubric? Google for one. There's really no reason to reinvent the wheel.
- Accept that it will take you a while to gain your footing in the classroom. Be willing to change midway through the term and to do different things for different sections because not all students are the same.
- Take advantage of any courses/workshops/tutorials that will help you become a better teacher. Again, the teaching center will probably offer workshops or brownbags. These are awesome as a grad student because most of the attendees will be TT faculty so you can see what they're struggling with or what they're doing that works and use it in your teaching. Doing that early on will make you more effective in the long run, leading to better evals.
- Devise and administer a midterm evaluation of your students that's for you. Take their feedback seriously and incorporate it into the course. It almost always leads to improved semester evals, even if you don't change very much.
- Have someone else (an experienced teacher) observe your teaching. It will be painful and awkward and difficult. But, it will help you improve. It will also give you more material for your future teaching portfolio.
- Take the time to identify excellent teachers on campus (whether or not they're in your field) and observe them. You may need to ask them first, of course. If you're having trouble finding someone, ask the teaching center. Watching other people who are awesome, especially those who do it in totally different ways (like observing a lecture for 400 students vs a seminar for 30 students), will help you understand the variety of what works and identify some techniques that will work for you.
- Oh, and take the time to learn your students' names whenever possible. They appreciate it.
 
Okay, that was a lot of advice and probably more than you can do all in one semester. But, I hope it helps someone!

I feel like USPS just shit all over Canada Post.
 
Congrats!!

I just received my letter today. I was awarded a category B for 2 years with a score of 12.5. After many attempts at a Tri-Council grant, which all resulted in rejection, I am super excited and relieved that I finally succeeded! Congrats to everyone else who received a SSHRC, sorry to everyone who did not, and best of luck to those who can apply again next year.

"social life"? what is this "social life" you speak of? XD

I'm fortunate in that in my program you get to select every member of your committee, including your advisor. For my advisor I went with the person in my department whose field of expertise I felt would be well suited to my research. I took a class with that professor and we clicked well enough that I felt confident it would be a good fit. My advisor is also really great at thinking up new angles to approach a given question from, something that is really valuable to me as I sometimes get tunnel vision.
My second committee member is outside my department/discipline, but also the expert on my research topic. I'm intimidated by this person because I really look up to and admire the work they have done and this person has so much knowledge to bring to my project. However, I'm glad they are a committee member rather than my advisor because I don't feel as comfortable or confident in discussions with them (always worried about making the best impression!).
My third committee member has little research overlap with my project but I get along with this person fantastically. They are super supportive and the kind of person that you could go to with anything - super friendly, easy-going, and supportive. For me, having three committee members who each bring something specific and different to my research is important to me. It provides me with a sense of balance because I can go to different members for different things.
 
So I guess my advice would be that, if you only get one supervisor, pick someone that can contribute to your research in a valuable way, but also make sure that you are comfortable talking to this person, brainstorming with them, etc. You need someone who will support you through the ups and downs of your PhD and who can also challenge you to produce the best work that you can. Be aware that not everyone will be the best fit and that your both have responsibilities to each other.

An aggravatingly common attitude.

Technically no. 25 years and a bit is strictly larger than 25. 
 
....