TakeruK

Yes, I have known students who entered a PhD program after working as a researcher, often at the same school, but not always. In general, the additional research experience will certainly improve your application. And when you apply for PhD programs in the future, you should apply to more than just this top 10 school, in my opinion. In general, although I am not in your field, I find that about 30-40% of new students in my top 10 program tend to have some kind of experience between undergraduate and the PhD program, whether it's a researcher position, a lab manager type position, a masters degree, or some combination!

The short answer is "yes". The long answer is that the quotation marks means that if the school offers a terminal Masters program, and if it's not necessarily fully funded, then generally, a larger fraction of terminal Masters applicants are accepted than PhD applicants. This is very generally true for engineering disciplines. The numbers I've seen are something like 5-10% acceptance fraction for PhD applicants and 50%-60% for terminal Masters applicants. Since you are in engineering field and the way you stated the school's question implies that they do have a terminal Masters program, I think for your case, the answer is a yes.

It was also hard for my parents to understand and support my decision. But this was mostly due to ignorance and explaining how academia works and how graduate "school" is really more like an apprenticeship/entry level position, and some time, they eventually understood and now are great supporters. My parents are refugee immigrants that gave up a lot so that their children can be raised in Canada and go to school and get a good job so I understand that they were worried how after all these years, one of their children finally got a degree but is still not working?! After reading about some of the toxic family members in this thread and previous GradCafe threads, I feel very lucky to have such supportive parents. It took awhile to convince them but it is nice to have them on your side. Although they said they supported me when I started my MSc, I don't think they were really fully on board until about a year or so into my program, so for some of you, it might take a little while! I hope your family members will come around. Try your best to understand their point of view and to educate them if it's just ignorance. But I agree with the above that if you have toxic family members, don't let them stop you from doing what's best for you!

I mostly agree with rising_star that your SOP should be focussed on the research you want to do as a doctoral student. That said, in my field, SOP prompts generally will ask the applicant to write something about their post-PhD plans and goals. However, this section should be very very short. I addressed it via 2 sentences at the end of my SOP. So, the fact that you have non-academic career goals should not be a major factor in your SOP content. I would also advise you to avoid saying that you want to pursue a non-academic career path, unless your field is one where this is a common path. I think many professors are realistic and realise that there are way more PhD graduates than academic positions, and that they realise not everyone wants to turn out just like them. However, there are still a fraction of professors who think that students who don't end up in academia after a PhD are failures and they won't want to admit you! You don't know who will be evaluating your application so I think that mentioning non-academic careers can only hurt you in your application. Unless a particular program prides itself on the placement of its graduates outside of academia, there is almost no way for this to help you. Instead, once you are admitted and get a good feel for how professors will react, then you should seek out the supportive ones and talk to them about your career goals! I talked to some professors at a mentoring session recently about non-academic careers and they said that professors tend to be hesitant to bring up / suggest a non-academic career path to their students because they are afraid of sounding like they are saying "you're not good enough for academia". So, I think since it's our career, it's our responsibility to make the first step and seek support when we are pursuing non-academic career paths. Just that the application SOP is not the right place for it, in my opinion, because you don't know who will read it. You'll have more control and get better results when you seek out your own advisors/mentors on this topic.

I agree that these honours you list are worthy of mentioning. But the standard way to include these honours (and even higher honours) is to list them as a line in your CV. It would be very abnormal to scan a copy of the certificate or any other material for the honour.

For #3, at least in many science fields, a research based masters might have something like N courses plus a MSc thesis to defend while a course-based masters would be like 2*N courses and no thesis (it might also just be 1 year instead of 2). But since you answer "PhD program" to #1, then question #3 doesn't really apply since there aren't really any course-based PhD! As for your latest question, I'm not sure. As I said above, I'm used to programs where you have to ask permission to take courses prior to taking them, not afterwards! So, a program wouldn't terminate a student for taking courses outside of the department--they would just prohibit you from registering! However, you really should check your program's policies. Are these outside-of-dept courses you are taking able to count towards your PhD program requirements? If they do not and the department finds out, they could remove you from the courses and/or block you from taking further courses. They can also consider all the time spent towards these courses as not time spent towards completing program requirements, which might give them an argument that you are not spending enough time in their program, and thus not making satisfactory progress and remove you. You also mention "legal authority". Unless it is a case of discrimination, the law does not really apply to schools' decisions to pass or fail you. So, it's not really a question of "legal authority". Instead, it's a question of your program's academic policies. I would be very careful to read them and ensure that your extracurricular activities (i.e. these courses) are not going to get you into trouble. If you can fulfill all of the expectations of your current program and also fit in a few extra courses, it should be fine. But if you are dropping responsibilities to your program in order to try something different, then this is bad. Finally, you say you have funding from an external source. You should also consult these policies in addition to your department/school's academic policies. If it's an external award, it might be awarded with the expectation that you do certain things, like make satisfactory progress in your own program instead of trying another program. Make sure there are no penalties for things like failing out of your current program. Overall, I don't know all the details and I can't really judge you for your actions. But given what you have said here, I think you are at least in a moral gray area if you are trying to use your standing in a current program without intention of completing it in order to get a footing in another unrelated program. Maybe there are really good reasons for what you're doing, but I'd be careful, for all the reasons I said above. Would it not be more honest and ethical to drop out of the program that you are no longer interested in / no longer have intention of completing and start a new program that you are passionate about?

I understand that you want to protect yourself by not revealing extra information but it's also hard to give good answers without knowing some basic information. For example, whether you are in a research based PhD program or whether you are in a professional graduate program would make a big difference! You don't have to name fields precisely, but I think in order to give more useful feedback, it might be helpful to say: 1. Are you in a Masters or PhD program? 2. Are you in a funded program? 3. Are you in a research-based graduate program or a course-based program? 4. How different are the two fields you're considering? Is it like you are in an astrophysics program but want to do computer science? Or, is it like you are in an astrophysics program and now want to do genetics? However, if you really don't want to answer these questions, here are some general thoughts based on the limited information you gave. All references to my experience are for a funded, research-based PhD program in the physical sciences, which might not be relevant to you! A. Yes, in most graduate programs, your advisor will know exactly what courses you've taken. In my program and every program I've been to, my advisor actually has to sign off on all courses taken. I guess if you are already taking courses in another department right now, then you probably didn't need anyone to sign off! But, other faculty in my program will also see my transcript/courses taken when I am up for review during qualifying exams, candidacy, and maybe even advancement from one year to another. B. Most schools aren't going to just let you switch graduate programs. You will have to apply to the new PhD program. In order to do this, you will likely want to get LORs from your current program. So, at some point, you are going to have to have a tough conversation with your faculty and let them know your intentions. It might be tough to get a good LOR if you take actions now that can be construed as deceptive later (e.g. accepting funding and telling people you want to continue in the program when you intend to leave all along). C. I agree that you need to think about your future too! I think there should be a nice clean way for everyone to end up happy but the exact details depend on information you haven't provided. For example, one potential solution is to finish your current program with a Masters degree. During this time, you should still fulfill all requirements of your program and do whatever TA/RA work required for your funding and meet all department needs. You should also take additional courses in whatever field you want to go to next for your own development. In most cases, I believe that if you are acting honestly and do not shirk your own program's requirements, it should be okay for you to seek out additional training/education for your future. And then when you leave the program, you can get a good LOR because it's understandable that you leave the program because of your changed research interests, not because the department was unhappy with your work or other conflicts. And, you'd leave with a degree, something to show for your time. D. Finally, I just want to point out that there are resources on campus for you too. Maybe you would feel more comfortable sharing info there instead of strangers on the Internet. Resources on campus would also be more familiar with specific policies and protocol for your program. They might even know how faculty members generally behave and can help you strategize when to tell them etc. At my school, the Dean of Graduate Studies' office is exactly the place you want to go to get help with issues like this.

You and the other posters are from a social science field but I think what has been said applies to other fields too! I also struggle with some of the same issues and feel that I can't come up with original ideas. In the last few months, I've talked more with the postdocs in my field and observed how they come up with their research topics. And I'm glad to see that very experienced people (e.g. rising_star) have said things that alleviated some of my concerns: you don't have to come up with whole new theories and ideas in grad school! I have noticed that junior researchers (e.g. senior grad students & postdocs) generally come up with new project ideas by reading the literature and learning about all the different techniques and what has been done so far. Sometimes you will be able to think of a way to use a technique or a solution from one problem to apply to another. I find that going to conferences and listening to talks, especially those that aren't exactly in your field (but related) is very helpful to get new thoughts/ideas flowing. Sometimes the first idea you think of isn't very good and you'll find lots of flaws but discussing or thinking about it further instead of giving up can lead to something else cool. I also find it helps to discuss your ideas with other people, but as we have seen in some other threads on TheGradCafe, in some departments, this leads to your colleagues stealing your ideas. So I guess you have to be careful in picking your collaborators/people to bounce ideas off. And finally, reading the literature is time consuming and hard! I know it's hard to make time for it with other obligations that are more immediately demanding, such as TA and RA work, but the way I see it, reading the literature is as much of your "work" as a grad student as TA and RA work is. So, assign it a priority and make time for it, as you would other priorities/commitments. There are also other things you can do to make reading more effective (sometimes I find it really dry and boring and get unmotivated). I prefer creating small informal reading groups and discussing papers with other people. I find that the social pressure of actually having read some material and contributing intelligent thoughts does a good job of making sure I actually read and think about the papers!

Bundling has made my renters insurance free too! I agree that you should set your deductible based on what your savings and budget can handle. In the past, I chose to have a $500 deductible vs a $1000 deductible and pay $300 more per year ($25/month). However, the way I see it, it's basically taking out a $500 loan where you pay $25/month in perpetually, even after you've paid off the $500. Now that I have the ability to put away $500 in a savings account in case I need my insurance, I've switched to a $1000 deductible. After 20 months (at $25/month), I have saved the total difference and I don't have to continue paying $25/month. I put it this way because the whole business of insurance is to give you peace of mind, but sometimes, peace of mind costs more money and causes more stress in other areas! It's up to each person how much the peace of mind is worth--for the first year of insurance, I certainly needed to have that lower deductible because I couldn't handle an extra $500 unexpected expense (but could handle the extra $25/month). However, as soon as I was able to put away $500 and modify the terms, it was one of the first things you could do to save money. Other insurance things that were kind of mentioned is that you can classify your driving as pleasure only (i.e. only on weekends for groceries/errands and removing the commute use) and due to the lower use, it should lower your rate. That might be a good idea if there is good transit or if you can walk/bike to school. There's also a low usage rate--at State Farm, we pay less for our insurance because we drive it less than 7500 miles per year.

Well, sometimes the financial aid question is specifically marked as "This question does not affect your admission decision". If you want to showcase your awards and honours, do not upload them like this. Instead, just list them in your CV, if they are relevant. I would not list minor awards and honours.

You will never please everyone. Not as a TA, not as collaborator, not as a research assistant, not as a postdoc, not as an assistant professor, not as a tenured professor, not as the dept chair etc. No matter what you do, there will be people who think you are not doing a good job. Getting reviews is good but it's also important to be able to filter them and determine which voices to listen to and which voices to ignore. It is part of the job! In your particular case, I think anyone reading this particular "bad review" will not fault you. The claims against you are ridiculous. TAs trade shifts with each other all the time so the claim that you "sent another TA in your place" is silly. In addition, everyone will know that the TA does not decide what lab materials to use. Honestly, what are you going to do with the "good stuff" ?? It's not like you're going to be going off and doing the lower division lab courses by yourself just for fun!! No one is going to get perfect reviews, even if they are the best TA ever. This is why reviews are collected in aggregate and averaged out. It's human nature for us to find the one bad review out of 20 and focus on that, but we're missing the other 19 reviews. You wouldn't do this in your teaching or your research--you wouldn't spend all of your energy on 5% of your research, so don't do this for your teaching evaluations! I know it's easier said than done--it's okay and human to feel upset about the mean reviews and then we move on

I found one pretty good way to save money with insurance and that is to bundle a lot of your insurances together. For example, the place I rent from requires us to have renter's insurance so I get renter's and car insurance from the same people. Then, I get the bare minimum in liability for both renter's and car insurance and instead add an umbrella personal liability plan (which would cover me for liability in both cases). Having 3 insurance plans provides a substantial discount on all 3 plans. If you already are doing something like that though, then another thing you can consider is instead of dropping some coverage completely (keep in mind that some states will require certain coverage), you can just raise your deductibles. If you are a good driver, then it's a good idea to have higher collision deductibles. It may vary from place to place, but if you are deemed not at fault for a collision, you usually do not have to pay the collision deductible. Also, the annual amount saved for a higher deductible may be significant. For example, I find that the difference between a $500 and a $1000 deductible is often around $300-$400 per year. This means that if you go for the $1000 deductible, you will begin saving money after 1.5 years (put that money in a savings account in case you do need the deductible). This is only a good idea if you have enough savings to absorb that extra $500 in case something does happen. Overall, if you do have the savings, I'd recommend going for higher deductibles and putting your money aside (i.e. "self insure"). When you pay more for a lower deductible, you will likely end up spending more money in the long run. Also, make sure your coverage is not redundant. If you have good medical coverage elsewhere for your own injuries, you can reduce the amount of coverage that your own plan provides for your own injuries (careful, often this won't cover other passengers in your car!). I do find that getting extra liability through your own insurance saves you a lot of money when you rent a car and then you're able to opt out of the car rental company's expensive insurance plans.

First, most of the time, when the place asks you for a SSN (e.g. doctor's office), just check if it's required. Usually it's not absolutely required. I did get a SSN though, based on my funding, but in the week or two prior to my SSN arriving, here's what I did: Cell phone: T-Mobile will accept I-20 or DS-2019 in lieu of a SSN Utilities: My electric company accepted my Canadian Passport # in lieu of a SSN. In fact, since my SSN was "for employment only", they don't even want that. For all foreign students, our SSNs will be for employment only, not for credit. Internet (AT&T): I used my Canadian credit card to set up the account and pay the deposit. Apartment: I showed my landlord proof of income from the school and I had requested and printed out my Canadian credit history from Equifax and Transunion, which are also credit reporting agencies in the US. Of course, the Canadian and US credit histories are separate, but my landlord said they appreciated seeing that I had good Canadian credit and that it was a factor in having a low security deposit on my apartment. Credit card: I got this after my SSN but my SSN has nothing to do with it (my wife was able to get one without a SSN) because as I said above, our SSNs are for employment, not credit. I asked my bank for advice upon opening my account and they said the general thing is to build up a minimal amount of US banking and credit history and then apply for a card. I arrived in September, received a few paycheques, paid a few bills and then by December, was successfully able to apply for a US Student credit card. Student credit cards are a good bet because most Americans applying for them also have almost no credit (since you generally apply for this once you turn 19 and have no credit!).

I guess I might have misunderstood your original post then. When I read your first post, I didn't think that you were still strongly considering the UK program. I thought you said it was your first choice but since you didn't get funding, you are going to attend the Canadian program instead. But, since you got the deferral, you were only going to use the UK program as a backup in the unlikely event that you don't like your Canadian program. However, now you clarify that you intend to study at the UK school in a year after all. So if you are starting the Canadian program with the intention of enrolling in the UK program in 1 year, then I think you are being dishonest and I would not advise this action. (Assuming that the Canadian program is 2 years long). I see a lot of people on these forums trying to "have their cake and eat it too". I understand the worry that you will lose both, but when you are granted a deferral, you have to believe in the process that you will get a spot in the following year (otherwise, what is the point of a deferral?). At this point, I do think you have to commit to one school or the other, in the sense that you need to either choose the Canadian school and enroll with the intention of completing it (sure, if there are no rules from the UK school against it, you can keep the deferral in your back pocket in case you are terribly unhappy at the Canadian school), or withdraw from the Canadian school and plan on enrolling in the UK school in a year. I believe that taking the funded offer from the Canadian school with the intention of completing their program is dishonest and will generally hurt students in general. I also understand the worry about investment in the long run and only you can decide whether the UK school is worth the cost. But you need to decide that now. If you cannot decide right now for whatever reason, then my opinion is that the proper course of action is to also get a deferral from the Canadian school for a year. Spend the next year selling your property, saving money, and thinking hard about what you really want to do. Then commit to one school or another. Don't attend one school with the intention of leaving it for another.

I agree with GeoDUDE that you should not write about your GRE scores in your SOP. They are what they are and nothing you can really say will change them. Instead, focus on your research and department fit in the SOP. Your CV will list all the other things you say in order to back up the point that your GRE scores don't define your ability. In my field, the Physics GRE is more important than the general GRE score. While I did well on the General GRE, I did relatively poorly on the Physics GRE (two attempts, both at the 50th percentile or just under, back in the day where you have to send all your scores). I didn't discuss these scores at all in my application. Like you, I had good research background and just focussed on that to make the case that I will be an excellent graduate student. The way I see it**, admissions committees are looking for evidence that you will excel in their program, not for reasons to reject you. There are more than one way to show it, and if you don't have high GRE scores, then show them that you'll excel through other means, such as your research experience. So focus on what makes you excellent! (**Sorry, this is just my opinion, no personal experience on an admissions committee here!) All that said, if you really really really want something in your application to directly say "psychkita's GRE scores don't reflect their abilities, which are excellent!" you should ask a LOR writer to discuss this. I provide my LOR writers with all of my GPAs and GREs and let them decide what to write, but you could prompt/prime one of your LOR writers by telling them that you are worried how admissions committees will view your GRE scores and ask their advice / ask if they would be willing to discuss that. Since they might have served on an admissions committee in your field already, they would know how to best address the issue.

In my opinion, starting a program with the intention of leaving it after 1 year for another program is immoral. Also, if a deferral is granted with the expectation that you will commit to that program in some future time, then accepting the deferral with the intention of not honouring that time is also immoral. For your case, I think moral obligations potentially exist for two schools: For the Canadian school, I do not believe your intentions are going to be immoral. All you are saying is that since you have a deferral from the UK school, you are going to give the Canadian school a try and if you don't like it after 1 year, you'll pursue other options. This is completely fine, and always true. You are not expected to commit to finishing a program once you agree to start it. You just should not already have the intention to quit early when you start. For the UK school, there is one potential tricky part. Based on the deferral granted, are you allowed to attend another school while on deferral from the UK school? If you are, then everything is great. However, if they are granting you a deferral because they expect you to get ready for their program and begin next fall, then I think you are being a dishonest here by telling them you'll attend next year but you are really just keeping them as a backup plan. Since this is not a funded offer, I don't think you are really obligated to begin next fall by accepting a deferral. However, that reasoning there is, in my opinion, not enough if the deferral was granted with the expectation that you attend next fall. I think the best thing to do is to find out, in some way, whether or not the 1 year deferral is an "option for you to attend next fall, if you'd like" or if it is "okay we wanted you to start the program this fall but since you need to get things in order, we'll expect to see you next fall instead".

This is normal and it is actually a good sign. The fact that your advisor took that much time to go through your work and write comments is a good thing. It means they care about your success. It would have been soooo much easier / less work for them to just take a quick pass at it, correct only the bare minimum so that the content is not incorrect and leave it up to you to figure out how to improve the style. This is terrible for you though because you will not learn this way. I also had a lot of corrections when I first started. I still have a lot now, actually, but it's decreased a fair bit. In the beginning, I was submitting 5-7 sentence abstracts for conferences that had 2 or 3 revisions suggested for each sentence. When I got to writing my first paper, it was about 10 pages in journal format and we had two iterations where the number of Adobe "comments" that appeared was about 200 each time. However, I learned a lot from the first 2 years of comments like this. I have noticed my own writing improve by a huge amount! A couple of months ago, I was a coauthor on a grant proposal and I noticed the writer had a lot of issues similar to my old issues. It was the first time I was able to significantly improve a piece of writing with my numerous edits. So, it won't be long before learn from all of these comments and soon you too will be the one leaving a ton of comments on work you care about! In the meantime, I agree that it's fine to step away from the comments and paper for awhile, and then go back, make the edits and improve! It's good that over 75% of the edits don't require you to iterate further with your advisor. And again, appreciate the fact that your advisor cares enough to spend this much time and effort to help you improve your work.

I agree with the above--this will only hurt you. Also, high school classmates is not a relationship that "originates in academia". Usually, you want an academic relationship where the letter writer was in some kind of position to evaluate you (instructor, supervisor etc.), not a classmate. Also, you don't want an academic LOR to attest to things like work ethic and character. In my opinion, this is not the point of a LOR--it's not like letters of reference for employment. You want an academic LOR to be about your knowledge and experience and expertise/leadership in your field. Things like work ethic can be gleaned from the way your LORs say the above things and from your GPA. In your shoes, I would find a third professor in your field from one of the other classes you did well in for your third LOR. Even a mediocre letter from a professor in your field would be better than one from your friend with a PhD in a completely unrelated field.

I am not in SLP but we sometimes discuss this issue in my field too, especially when it comes to aspects of our career such as giving talks and asking questions in a seminar, or even the way we talk about issues at group meetings. In my opinion, I don't think anyone should be advised to "correct" their voice in order to "fit in" with the norm. The norm in my field is like the norm in many areas--strong, authoritative voices are listened to, and voices that sound "different" (feminine, accented, quiet) are less likely to be listened to. In fact, I've sat in meetings where female colleagues say something and no one hears them until another person (male usually) repeats it. I speak with an accent and in an oral presentation class, the instructor suggested that I get speech therapy in order to "fix" my accent so that I sound more like a Caucasian person. Well, she didn't say "Caucasian person" but the implication was that I didn't sound like society's expectation for a professional. I think this is rubbish and instead of teaching people to sound more like some arbitrary set of norms, we should educate our colleagues to understand different voices (whether it's a feminine voice, "upspeak", an accent, or whatever). Let's celebrate diversity in our voices rather than reinforce existing discrimination.

Oh I missed the second request for help, which was "share your info with us". I'm sending you a PM with the details of the current plan at my school right now, if that helps!

Holy crap that is terrible. At my school, students are explicitly considered non-employees and our health insurance is subsidized (and got better this year compared to last year). The big affordable care act change that happened here was that dependents of students (spouses, children) were on a different plan that had higher rates. The ACA now prohibits schools from offering different plans (at different rates) to students vs. dependents so now families pay way less in health premiums. I think your student government really needs to push your school on this. To me, it sounds like the best way for your school (and the best for your students) is to get the school to switch away from a plan that is considered an "individual" plan. Good luck!

That sounds frustrating. In my experience, you might have one change prior to the term starting but never that many in such as short time. The standard procedure was to issue preliminary assignments, the TA coordinator collects all conflict information, resolves them, and then submits a new finalized schedule. At my MSc school, we sign a contract for the TA position approximately 1 week before the term start, and until that happens, nothing is set in stone yet. For your current situation, I agree that the best thing you can do right now is to try to switch with other TAs. I also agree that for future semesters, you should make your request for TA assignment ASAP, before assignments are made.

In that case, you should go to the main office on Monday and make an appointment to see him ASAP. Later this week is fine. Don't wait for him in the public area like that. It can only make it worse for you because when they are on a break to get a lunch or a drink or go to another meeting, they don't have time to think about your situation.

It is certainly a good sign because they wouldn't spend this effort on you if they don't like the idea of you applying. But I wouldn't read too much into it (that is, it's not necessarily a sign that you will be accepted) because they might do this for every student that they want to come to their school. The reality of grad school admissions is that there are way fewer spots than qualified applicants so in the end they will be rejecting a lot of people they still would want to have come. So, take the chance to meet the faculty and students, make a good impression, but don't read too much more into it other than that you should definitely apply to the schools if you like them!!

Can you ask other students you know about the best way to contact the deans in your school? It can vary from place to place. At my school, you need to be fairly persistent and coming into the Dean's office in person is a good idea (if they are busy at the time, you can schedule an appointment with the admin assistant right there). Emailing the Dean is rarely a good idea--this person is far too busy to schedule things. You could try to find their admin assistant's contact info and email that person to set up an appointment but it's much easier to phone or better yet, come in person. When you talk to this person, continue being pleasant and respectful and bring up the time sensitive issue. Also, at my school, there is one Dean of Graduate Studies, but there other Associate Deans for issues like yours. Eventually the Dean will sign off on it, but it's likely someone else in the Office can process the paperwork and grant the approval. This is another reason why it's much better to come to the office in person, talk to the staff there and they will get your sorted out with the right person to talk to and help you get what you need ASAP. And finally, for non-urgent issues (which is what your issue will appear to be, unless you tell them in the way I suggest above), Dean offices tend to move slowly. I was approved for candidacy by my department in February this year and the only step left was approval/confirmation from the grad office (which is just a check of the department's paperwork). The official advancement to candidacy did not happen until July, 5 months later.