TakeruK

Coursera courses do not grant credit for transcripts. If you want actual credit that is worth something equivalent to other courses you took in your degree, then you have to enroll as a distance-ed student (or whatever name schools may use) at a University. Maybe your undergrad school does this? In general, it is tough to both get college credit for an online course and also get the benefit of online courses (take at your own pace etc.) Online courses for credit, in my experience, follow the same schedule as a "in person" course. P.S. Please don't post the same topic multiple times---I've deleted your other duplicate post.

Even if it doesn't work out, moments like this are part of what makes academia/research so fun!!

I did this. For the schools that said they wanted all transcripts, I sent in all of them, even the transcript from the one school that only had 1 course on it. For the schools that said they only wanted transcripts from schools from which I earned a degree, I did not include these visiting student classes. If you are not sure, I would just ask the school!

Sometimes it makes sense to send in extra documents, especially to explain/support something there is no space for in the standard application. However, this is not one of those cases. Since you are requested to write a 300 word SOP, you should not be sending an additional longer SOP. Instead, I would recommend that you write a new SOP that fits within 300 words instead of just cutting out stuff from a 600 word SOP. Being concise and following directions are important parts of being a graduate student!

Most schools accept scores electronically, as TheMonkeyOnMyBack says. I haven't heard only twice a week, but if that is the case, then that would make sense---for one school, I ordered the score report on Monday and on Tuesday morning, the school informed me they received the score! So, order as soon as they become online in your account. If this is close to your deadline, send the school a note saying that you've just ordered them so they know it's coming. Usually the scores do not have to arrive on time. I think I sent scores to about 2/8 schools after the deadline.

@Queen of Kale: I definitely agree with you that the GRE can be a way for non-traditional students to prove themselves. For example, in my field, there are many people who live in countries with either no opportunity to pursue a Physics BSc or high pressure from family and society against a Physics route. So, many students take Engineering degrees. The Physics GRE allows the admissions committees to compare these non-Physics students with Physics students on the PGRE. It's not clear how much correlation there is between PGRE score and Physics knowledge. So, personally, I'd take the approach of making the PGRE an optional item---i.e. just a chance for a candidate to demonstrate excellence instead of a tool to filter out those disadvantaged by the test. @rising_star: Although the timing is coincidental with events happening nationwide, this is something the field has been considering for awhile. For example, here is a 2014 article: http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7504-303a I do think though, that given what has been happening, this is the right time to push for a change like this! Now I'm a little sad that I won't be attending the AAS meeting this year! But I'll look out for an official announcement during that week (first work week in January!). One of the authors of the article (MIller) linked above came to my school to give a talk about why the GRE and PGRE are not good indicators of grad school success. We had a small meeting with students and Miller. Miller said that he thinks the test does more harm than good and so he would not even recommend allowing optional score submission. He still felt this way after presenting a very similar argument to what Queen of Kale wrote above. I still think there is more good than harm to be done by allowing optional scores, but I guess it's something still up for debate!

You are right that academia is a place where things are blurry. This is because your experience depends a lot on your advisor. Two students who are performing exactly the same might be deemed "satisfactory" by one professor and "unsatisfactory" by another professor. I don't think this is entirely fair, because having inconsistent expectations does lead to inequalities across students in the department. And, for small schools like mine, there is usually only 1 professor doing exactly one topic, so it's not just a matter of "If you don't like the professor, work with someone else" because it really means "if you don't like this professor, you have to work in a different subfield". In addition, my field is also really small, so if many professor in a subfield are this way (it's possible for a subfield in my field to be almost entirely dominated by alumni of one or two faculty at a top 10 school), the entire subfield is now pushing away people. To this end, we're working on more standardized expectations of both professors and students. However, academia has very strong feelings about keeping autonomy of researchers and faculty, and to some extent, there is always going to be some room for interpretation by each professor. While I hope that information makes you feel better that things may change in the future, the reality is that right now, that stuff won't help you. To answer some of the questions that you raised in this thread (either directly or indirectly): 1. How often would a professor compare a new student to old student? All the time. In fact, I think this is one of the main metrics that faculty member use to evaluate graduate students. On the LOR forms, faculty are often asked to rank this student compared to all of their other students. This is also a topic of discussion when a faculty member is presenting their student for acceptance to candidacy or other graduate school milestone. Since it is very hard to set absolute guidelines for performance in grad school (where everyone is doing different things), the standard criteria is "How does this student compare to other students?" Are they progressing as expected? Are they taking more courses? More TAships? etc. I agree with you that it's not very fair for the professor to compare you with his former students only, but that may or may not be a "kick in the pants" type comment rather than a formal evaluation. I think you can at least rest assured that when it comes time for the department to formally evaluate all of their students for funding, they will do so by comparing you to all students in the department, not just the small sample size of your prof's old students only. 2. When will your advisor deem you worthy/not worthy? I agree with you that one semester is too short to kick someone out. But your advisor is not saying "Based on your performance this semester, I am kicking you out". Your advisor is saying "So far, your work this semester is sub-par and I want you to improve". This is not a final evaluation of you---you can think of it as a mid-term review or just giving you some very important feedback. After all, it would also be unfair to wait an entire year, then make a final evaluation "You're kicked out because of poor performance this past year", when you had no warning or indication at all that you were underperforming. In my program, during Year 1, we take 30 hours of courses per week (including time for reading and homework etc.) and are expected to work about 20 hours on research per week, plus a few hours for department seminars etc. During this time, we must come up (with help from our advisors) with two research ideas and carry them out. We don't have to fully complete them, just a proof of concept that it is a viable research idea and that we have encountered most, if not all, of the unexpected nuances and problems that would arise. At the end of Year 1, we defend both projects in front of a committee of 5 professors (including our project advisors) in a 3 hour oral exam. After this exam, the committee deliberates and determines whether or not you get to continue in the program or you leave with a Masters (or leave immediately with nothing). One very very important aspect is whether or not your advisors recommends you to continue onto a PhD with them. Your advisors being happy with your progress is the most important part---the other committee members are just there to make sure your advisors aren't being overly lenient or overly harsh and that the quality of student that continues is in line with department norms. So, in my program, the direct answer to your question is after 1 year (or 3 semesters). However, your program is not making the same determination! Again, we get feedback from people at all points during the year so that we are able to do the best we can on the end of year exam. I think your advisor is following good feedback pedagogy by providing you with early feedback now, when you can still take action on it. It would be utterly useless if the only feedback you got was the final evaluation. I'm sorry that you don't like the content of the feedback and perhaps the advisor could have presented it in a better way (I wasn't there so I don't know), but I highly recommend that you reframe this information as constructive feedback designed to help you succeed, instead of a damning evaluation of your performance. 3. When do people write papers? This depends a lot on the field. Most people in my program will be working on stuff that will eventually go into a paper almost immediately. There is no "transition period" where you only do classes and TA work. From the first day, we are doing work that will lead to a paper. I know this varies a lot from field to field though. Depending on the nature of the work, students in my program typically publish their first paper in year 2 or year 3. For people working on theory/mathematical modeling, a paper can be finished as early in year 2. For those running experiments or working with large amounts of data, the first paper may take longer to complete. In summary, here is my advice to you moving forward: A. As others said, talk to other students in your program about normal progress and expectations. Talking to other students here is a good idea, but remember that things vary a lot from program to program and even advisor to advisor. So, while you will still benefit from hearing more perspectives, it's important to not apply something from another program or advisor to your situation without careful review. B. Remove your own perceptions and ideas of what is "fair" so that you can properly hear the advice behind the feedback. I agree with you that your advisor may be unfair in determining your performance as sub-par. However, don't focus on that part. There is obviously something they are unhappy about if they are saying this. Find out what it is. You might have to talk to them more about a performance review and ask for specific areas to improve. As Eigen said, this may be a sign of lack of clear communication. C. Still be yourself though. In step B, I suggest that you remove your own perceptions so that you can hear the "other side" but this doesn't mean that everything you think and feel is wrong. You are still you and you may be right that the advisor is acting unfairly. But you have to first distance yourself in order to understand what the other side is saying. Once you comprehend their point of view, then you can re-insert yourself and decide whether or not you want to do the things they are asking of you. Sometimes professors ask for unreasonable things---e.g. they might ask you to work 60 hours per week and you may decide that this is not what you want to do. D. After B and C, think about where you want to be in the future. Maybe you want to first try out doing everything the professor wants you to do in B and see how you feel about it. Eventually, you will have to decide if working with this advisor is the right fit for you. Finding this out sooner is better than later! This is why I think doing "B" is really important---the longer you just think your advisor is being unfair and ignoring what they say, the longer before you are really able to decide what you would want. If you want to work with another advisor in the department, once you decide that, start talking to other professors. If you want to quit and start again at another place, get those steps in place. E. Finally, I want to just disagree with VentureIntoNothingness's comment about academia being a cut-throat place and not for the weak. Sometimes, people accompany this with "needing thick skin". I really hate it when advisors and academics present it this way because it suggests that it's okay to bully or harass others in academia because we're "so cutthroat" and "weak students need not apply". This does not create a good atmosphere for our work. I agree that it is important for students and academics to be mature and aware enough to properly self-evalaute, handle constructive criticism and determine their own weaknesses (e.g. Step B above). But this is a far cry from calling those who cannot do this "weak". Also, I think the attitude that "academia is cutthroat, not for the weak" is a fatalist point of view that reinforces negative behaviour (such as bullying and harassment) rather than work on both improving students' ability to self-evaluate and handle critique as well as creating an inclusive work environment where bullying and harassment has no place. (Note: I know that maybe VentureIntoNothingness did not mean their comment to condone bullying and harassment but instead meant it in the positive ways I wrote above. I don't mean to pick on you, VentureIntoNothingness! It's just that I see many academics defend bullying or other nasty attitudes with the cutthroat/not for the weak/needing thick skin phrases and maybe you are using them without meaning them in the same way!)

When is the deadline? I know many BC schools had deadlines of Jan 15 for my program, so Jan 31 would be far too early to ask. But your program is different than mine, so it's hard to tell! With this info, I still would recommend that both of you apply to all opportunities presented to you at this point. There is nothing known for certain right now that means your husband will have to choose job or your PhD right now. One scenario I'm thinking of is that it would be better (in my opinion) for your husband to get the job and then choose not to take it, or not get the job and end up going with you to your PhD program than if your husband did not apply at all. It's pretty hard for anyone else to guess at your chances of admissions though. It certainly does not sound like you will be instantly rejected by your GPA because of the reception you've had so far. But if you are uncertain, I think it's fair for you to talk to the prof in each program and make sure they know about your GPA and ask them what they think your chances are because of your situation.

How many programs only allow for 3 names? If there is not many, you can just email that one recommender and say something like: Thanks for agreeing to write for all of these schools, but it turns out schools X, Y, and Z have a limit on the number of letters and I am not able to add you as a recommender---so you're off the hook! etc. Maybe you can say it in person if you prefer. Ultimately, as long as you don't get into specifics (no need to say how many recommenders or that they ranked 4th because of XYZ etc.) To be honest, even though they do want the best for you, they might be a little secretly glad to have less work to do.

In Astronomy, we have had discussions of eliminating the use of both the GRE and Physics GRE test scores in admissions for quite a while. People have written papers about their unfair use (see references in link below). Today, the President of the AAS wrote an draft open letter to all department chairs in Astronomy with the following recommendation: Recommendation: Given the research indicating that the GRE and PGRE are poor predictors of graduate student success, that their use in graduate admissions has a particularly negative impact on underrepresented groups, and that they represent a financial burden for many students in pursuing advanced degrees in the astronomical sciences, the AAS recommends that graduate programs eliminate or make optional the GRE and PGRE as metrics of evaluation for graduate applicants. If GRE or PGRE scores are used, the AAS recommends that admissions criteria account explicitly for the known systematics in scores as a function of gender, race, and socioeconomic status, and that cutoff scores not be used to eliminate candidates from admission, scholarships/fellowships, or financial support, in accordance with ETS recommendations. For the full text of the letter (which comes with a bibliography) as well as the AAS President's comments accompanying the letter, please see: http://aas.org/posts/news/2015/12/presidents-column-rethinking-role-gre To me, this is an exciting step in the right direction that will improve our field and help us recruit better junior members (and better colleagues for me!). I'd be interested to hear what others think and whether you know if your field's national society have been thinking about similar actions.

I think you should just describe the author ordering in your application materials (maybe when you discuss this paper in your SOP). Many journals also have a place in the article itself to indicate the amount of contribution by each author.

Many BC schools will release PhD results on the same timeline as American schools, so around Feb-April 2016. I think both you and your husband should apply to the PhD program and the job, respectively. Applying is not a commitment. If your husband gets a job offer before you hear back from the school, maybe he can ask for more time to decide. At the very least, it will give you a little bit more time to choose between one or the other.

This is a hard thing to figure out and I think it's really important to learn. I'm still trying to figure it out. Right now, my strategy is to work on it for 1-2 weeks and then see how much progress I've made / how feasible the idea is. For example, I might come up with what I thought would be a clever solution to X but then after 1.5 weeks of work, run into a lot more nuances and issues that I did not originally think of. It might not be as easy as I thought so I would put the project aside indefinitely. It's sometimes hard to judge how much progress in 1-2 weeks is "enough" and I consult with my advisor and other students to get a well rounded set of opinions. I know this is not really a full answer, but the key points I think are: 1) you have to actually just go and try it for awhile and see if it works and 2) don't be afraid to just give up / postpone a project after working a couple of weeks on it---learning what doesn't work is still helpful for you, and it's much better to stop after 2 weeks (maybe even waste the 2 weeks) than to continue working for months without results.

My opinion is that you should not have cover these up. It's not unprofessional to have tattoos or piercings at all. I think you should review any resources or materials you might have about expectations. If you are not sure you have read all the necessary materials, you could email the department and ask for the policies or guidelines (you might even specify dress code). I don't think you should have to ask about each tattoo or piercing individually. If the materials or their response does not include tattoos or piercing limitations (again, I would be surprised if I saw a TA handbook that did not allow this, but maybe I've only been at very liberal places?) then you should just go ahead and be yourself. Do what you want. If someone asks you to change what you are wearing, then politely ask them to direct you to the policy on the dress code (if confronting authority is uncomfortable, you can do it in a non-challenging way, and frame it in a way like "Oh, I want to make sure I follow proper protocol---what is the policy so that I can ensure I do it correctly?"). If it's not too late, one way to can test this is to just dress the way you plan to teach when you are meeting with the program head tomorrow. If they say something about the way you are dressed, then you can ask the policy question right then and there. If they do not, then you would know it's okay. This is just my opinion because I believe self-expression is extremely important and unless there is an official policy, I'm not going to change myself just to please someone. But if you are worried about upsetting someone with power over you (a very legitimate concern!!) then you can certainly go the more conservative route of hiding tattoos and piercings at first, see how people behave and then ask about your tattoos and piercings later, when they know you more. Just an alternative suggestion, if you prefer that

Being honest is fine. I am as honest in my evaluations as I think it would make a difference. If I don't think anyone takes my comments seriously, then I won't bother writing them. In my department, I know they are definitely read---a staff members types them all up and then binds them into a book and the book is distributed annually to all faculty members. Faculty read them to see their own evaluations and to use the information to advise their students on which courses would be valuable. I think the reports are considered during tenure review and the TA evals that go into those reports are used to help determine the TA awards each year. In addition to what others said about the professor, maybe they still think it was 5/5 teaching even if they had complained. Maybe they want to give everyone 5/5. That's their prerogative. And, keep in mind that teaching evaluations could have very little weight. In my opinion, these only matter when the professor reading them actually cares about their evaluations and take action to change their own teaching. Things vary from program to program, but I know my school will place almost zero weight on teaching evals for tenure evaluations. If the comments indicated that the professor violated code of conduct, then it might lead to an investigation, but otherwise, teaching ability has almost no impact on tenure here. Unfortunately, this also means that if a professor doesn't care about their teaching evaluations, their teaching would be crappy, then they would not read their comments (or not act on them) so their teaching remains crappy. Finally, keep in mind that relative to grad student timescales (5-7 years), departments and faculty operate on much longer timescales. Most departments I've experienced assign teaching duties on 3 year cycles and since it's really tough to put out a balanced schedule, there is very little that would change their schedules. So if Prof X is scheduled for Course Y for the next 3 years, even if they received all 0/5 on the first teaching evaluation, it is very unlikely that they will be removed from teaching that course in the next 2 years. Instead, maybe the next time they are considered for that course, the department will suggest they do something else. But, given that professors do shuffle courses in each 3-year-cycle, Professor X may not request this course again for another 2-3 cycles, which means something like denying Prof X the ability to teach a course that they were crappy at might be something that won't take affect for another 9-12 years. You'll never see this and even if you are around, you won't hear about it unless you get to sit in on the committee that decides this.

My opinion and experience is that if you are including a footnote or a citation in your statement of purpose then you are including too much research information. I don't think SOPs should go in such level of research detail that you would need to cite anything. Readers are not going to look up your citations. And although you might argue that citing a famous/recognizable paper might demonstrate that you are familiar with the current literature, remember that a large member of your audience will not even be interested/knowledgeable in your topic that they would recognize your citations as such. Instead, I think you can and should demonstrate your expertise with the current literature by discussing your research interests and tying it in the current problems in the field. You can do this at a level that does not require any citations.

When we meet new people in my field at conferences or other work stuff, the first questions are usually what's your name? where do you work? and what do you study? When we refer to colleagues we say "Oh, it's Jane from Ohio State, or Billy from WashU" etc. And institution is important for the observational part of my field because universities sign up and support different (competing) telescopes, so I know that if you are from U Arizona, it's likely you can apply to a certain suite of telescopes in Chile, and if you are from a University of California school, it means you have access to some in Hawaii. Also, my (sub)-field is small enough that if you find out someone is from School X, you might know someone else who is currently there and then you have a mutual friend! But I also feel a connection to my current school because I changed tracks with my research so all of my research that I am a part of now is from this school. Almost everyone in my subfield knows me as "TakeruK doing research X with Prof Y and School Z". I guess it's more like identifying with my specific department at my school, not just my school in general. For example, I wouldn't cheer for my grad school's sport teams or feel happy if they won or anything like that!

Note: For things like the UC school's personal history statement, remember that "Maximum X words" does not mean you must write X words, or even anywhere close to it. Take as many (or as few) words as you need to explain the relevant aspects. I had a few things to write about but I don't think mine was more than 400 words.

I have thought about this a lot too. I used to say, unequivocally, that the answer would be my undergrad school. But now, after many years in grad school and being more removed from undergrad, my answer has changed. My answer is now: depends on context. I feel like, with regards to higher education, I have two identities. My first identity is my personal identity. I associate things like learning how to learn, discovering my interests, growing into an adult, and developing into the person that I am. So, in this sense, I feel strongly connected to my undergrad institution. I feel like this school was where I became the person I am! Also, I feel this school is the best fit for me in the sense that the "culture" and values of this school matches my own well (not surprising since I was attending this school when I developed a lot of these values). When I think of myself as a person, I think of myself as a representative of this school's alumni. So, I don't think I can separate my personal identity from my school. In fact, I'm wearing a sweater with my undergrad school name on it right now, as I am typing this! My second identity is my professional identity---who I am as a researcher. I associate things like learning how to become a professional in my field, developing my research interests and building the foundation for my career with my (current) graduate school. My experiences at PhD school will forever be a part of me as a professional, whether I stay in academia or not. I do not think the culture of my graduate school is a good fit for what I personally value in life but that's okay, I'm just here to develop professionally, not personally. When I think of myself as a scientist, I think of myself as representing what a "SchoolName"-trained researcher is. I don't know if that makes sense? I do feel strong connections with both BSc and PhD schools, but for really different reasons!

I'm one of the people you mention that 1) had an established relationship before grad school and 2) has a partner who isn't a grad student. But my partner still works a lot and we do have to make time to see each other (especially before we moved in). The suggestion to have meals together is a good one. No matter how busy you are, you have to eat (doesn't have to be an elaborate/long meal break!). Also, another good idea is to take short breaks during the day with each other. Maybe take a 15 minute break at the campus coffee shop, or even just on a bench or something outside one of your buildings. When I get my coffee, I often see faculty member couples taking a short break with their partner. And, although it may seem/sound unromantic, sometimes you just have to schedule time for each other. Don't be afraid to put your relationship at the same level of priority as other work, if that is what you want**. For example, I have lunch with my partner almost every day, and I have a group meeting that is supposed to go 11am-noon. I always leave at 11:55am to make my lunch "appointment". My benchmark is that if I would leave that meeting early to meet with another professor for work reasons, then I will also leave the meeting early to make time for my partner (i.e. in rare situations, something critically important is being discussed and worth pushing other commitments back for). (**You don't have to want this, of course! I'm just saying that if you do, then you should go ahead and do so!). Another example is that sometimes, I'm asked to do something at work late (past 5pm). The request usually comes with something like "If you are not busy, I would like ...." For me, any time past 5pm is reserved for my partner and I. So, mentally, I always block that off as "busy" time and respond with "sorry, I am busy" and suggest another time (during my regular work hours 8am-5pm) to do the same. Of course, there are special exceptions for situations since as meeting/dining with a guest speaker, approaching a deadline, using the telescope (which only happens at night of course). But these exceptions are anticipated ahead of time. My point is that I feel a lot of students put their personal lives on hold for graduate work. Whenever they have to decide between a work or personal commitment (whether it's a relationship, a hobby, exercise, or whatever), they always choose work. I don't think choosing one way all the time is sustainable! I have set priorities/goals for myself based on what makes me happy and I make choices according to these priorities. Sometimes, I will choose work but I will also choose personal commitment just as often. You'll have to find the right balance that makes you happy or lets you reach whatever goals you decide for yourself, not others (i.e. not your advisor, not your partner etc.) Finally, I also want to second this and I would also give the same advice! If this relationship is important to you and makes you happy, then prioritize it for the now. Who knows what will happen by the time you graduate.

Agree with rising_star that you have to know them and how they would react to a gift of alcohol before you do it. If you are not sure, don't do it. sjoh197: my program also has a beer hour every friday too (not usually a kegger though). Seems like alcohol is a big part of geoscience programs (sometimes I feel we stress this too much though)

I agree that your use was correct and that is the correct meaning even in American English dictionaries. And if you gave an American the two sentences and asked them to match up the meaning, I'm sure they would get it. It's just that with academics/school as context, "suspension" carries so much negative connotation! And it's likely your SOPs will be skimmed so a reader may miss the distinction between "I suspended" and "I was suspended". So, I'd still recommend avoiding it. Also, if you write things like "Degree suspension", it's ambiguous as to which meaning you mean! And finally, sorry to keep harping on this, but taking a break from your studies is rarely (if ever) referred to as "suspension" in North America. We would say that "we took a leave of absence" (or just "we took a leave") or that "we took a break for 1 year" etc.

Most (but not necessarily all) of these emails are spam. Schools pay ETS to be able to advertise to you in this way. The first time I took the GRE, I didn't realise it so I ticked (or didn't tick) the box that resulted in getting these offers. I soon got a bunch of emails from programs completely unrelated to my interests (e.g. business schools, when I took the Physics GRE).

Alcohol is not necessarily an unprofessional gift. It depends on how well you know your profs and how well you think they will receive it. As long as you know they will be happy and enjoy your gift, it is a good gift. I would say the unprofessional gifts are the ones that are "too big". For example, if you had purchased a wine club subscription for each of your LOR writers, that would be too big of a gift and it would place most profs in an uncomfortable situation. You don't want them to feel that you are "buying" their LORs. From the description of your relationship, the "magnitude" of the gift is appropriate! If numbers help guide you, I spent about $15 on gifts for each letter writer, and a bit more ($50 total) for my own thesis advisor.

Remember that your AWA score is reported as one single number representing the average of the two essays. So, even if you get a 3 on the short essay, a 5 on the second essay would still make your AWA score be a 4. That is, you don't have to worry about this particular essay being a 4 if you are confident about the second essay. You'll find out your score pretty fast and if it's not good enough, you certainly have nothing to lose by asking the school to submit another set of scores. By the way, schools using GRE scores as filters are acting against ETS recommendations of use of scores and also studies have shown that this practice leads to unfair biases (see: http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7504-303a).