TakeruK

Agree with lewin's response. In the STEM fields, Waterloo is a top engineering program. In physics, the Guelph/Waterloo Quantum computing institute is really good. York has a great space science program. Alberta has a really good earth science program (the Canadian north is a great place to collect meteorites and a lot of them go to U Alberta). However, I still think there are 3 schools (Toronto, McGill, UBC) that stand out from the rest in their overall programs and are well known nationwide. But when you get down to specific subjects, there are other strong schools, and in fact, some of the "top 3" aren't the "top 3" in some fields. For example, I do not think McGill has a very strong astronomy program at all (when I applied years ago, they had very few professors working on this) but I know they are hiring more.

I agree with lewin. I had the "old" NSERC CGS-M and it was the same way! In addition, because each school wants the NSERC CGS-M recipient to choose their school, each school will often grant "signing bonuses" to people who come in with the CGS-M. My school granted an extra $5000 for anyone with a NSERC, CIHR, or SSHRC award at any level. This allowed me to take home more than $42,000 in my first year of my MSc (it was much less after paying tuition but that year remains my highest take-home income year ever!). Having a CGS-M also allowed students to negotiate offers better -- since you will be almost free for your advisor, this allowed you to basically work for anyone you wanted. Finally, when it was granted nationwide, there was a CGS-M and a PGS-M level award (PGS-M is $200 less). Almost all applicants received a CGS-M, but if you wanted to take your award outside of Canada, you would have to take the PGS-M instead. Now, you cannot take this money outside of Canada, and Canadians that study in the US can only apply for the PGS-D and thus are limited to only 3 years of NSERC/SSHRC funding rather than the 4. However, clinpsych99 is right that most admissions decisions are still made before the ~April 1 notification date for the CGS-M. It's not quite the recruiting tool that you might interpret lewin's post to be, but instead, since the school decides who gets the CGS-M, it takes agency away from the student (you lose all of the benefits I wrote above). Also, it could be a "recruiting tool" in the sense that if you have not yet made a decision between A and B by April 1, either A or B can use the CGS-M award as a way to entice you / improve your offer. This is still good for you, however, this gives control to the school, not to the student. And finally, I just want to point out that although I still feel these changes are bad, it's important to look at these changes in the context of a lot of other changes that happened with NSERC (and maybe SSHRC too?) at this time. Under the old NSERC rules, students that are paid on NSERC awards at any level cannot also be paid by their researcher through their researcher's NSERC grants. This means a CGS-M holder actually costs the department more money (but the advisor a lot less money) than someone who does not hold a NSERC award. Also, the CGS-M used to be a 2 year award (before my time though), and perhaps having the school make the decision on a 1-year award isn't so bad. Although it does remove student agency, it does allow schools to have more control over their budgets and they know exactly how much $$ they will be getting from SSHRC/NSERC each year. I can imagine for big schools, they know they will always get a fair number of award holders, but small schools might have large fluctuations in how many award holders come, which can make good budgeting very difficult. With school controlled quotas, they know how many award holders will be present each year. Overall, while I can see the immediate detriments to student agency with the CGS-M change, I acknowledge that there may be a lot of other factors I don't know about (after all, we mostly only see the "student" side) that make this change a good choice. However, I still really hope (for future students' sake) that the CGS-D/PGS-D structure remains the same!!

I took both of these courses in my undergrad, with descriptions very similar to the ones you listed. As others said, the "Linear Algebra" course was all about theory and our problems were mostly proofs about various matrices. The "Numerical Linear Algebra" course had the "Linear Algebra" course as a pre-req and while we did not learn any more theory (each class was a review of what we learned in "Linear Algebra" and then we went on to learn how to implement efficient numerical routines to solve these problems). So, our problems were mostly implementing algorithms derived in class based on the theories we learned in "Linear Algebra". From an astrophysics point of view, both of these classes were very helpful (although only "Linear Algebra" was required for the degree). I think having the theory as well as learning how to implement them as a computer program is essential for being a good researcher in the astrophysical sciences. I don't know what you will need for biostat though, but I would imagine that the class with the numerical approach is going to be more helpful. And especially if your numerical class does not require the theoretical class as a pre-req, you might just learn what theory you need along the way. (I learned way more linear algebra theory than I ever needed in my Linear Algebra class).

You select your start date to be the date closest to your program start date. No, you may not select May 1 if your program does not begin until September (Unless you are starting early!)

Unless you think the PI did something dishonest, I would just let it go. And even if you thought the grade was not fairly awarded, unless you need it corrected for some other reason, I would just let it go. I understand that the lack of feedback is a big downside of academia but it happens at all levels. The feedback we get for admission decisions, funding decisions, grading decisions, quals/comps exam decisions can be very minimal. I think it is an important skill for academics to learn from experiences independently, without feedback from our advisors. I think it's also important for us to develop the ability to "not sweat the small stuff", so to speak. However, since a B is the lowest passing grade, this means you still passed. Since the prof said that the doors are open if you want to join the lab, if you do want to join this lab, then you should definitely talk to the professor further. Don't mention the B or ask about why the grade was a B, just ask about future opportunities in this lab.

I'm in this category now, and yes I maintain a schedule (see my post above). I think it's especially important, for me, to keep a schedule when I don't have rigid structures like classes/TAing because it's easy to accidentally work too much or work too little! But I am a person that really likes schedule and structure so this works for me but might not work for you. If you do want to keep a schedule and want tips, I would recommend getting into a routine. Setting a waking time and a bedtime and sticking to it is probably the first step. Then, I would use apps like Google Calendar or whatever your favourite apps is to block out time for certain tasks. For some people, they find it helpful if they can schedule all their meetings in one or two half-day blocks. You can evaluate your schedule by setting small goals for each week (or each day) and see if you can meet them--adjust your scheduling later if you find you need more/less time to achieve certain tasks. I'm not saying everyone needs to have a schedule! But if you do, hope these tips help Personally, the biggest motivator for me to keep a schedule is so that I can get the work I need to get done during the day, which means I can relax and have free time in the evenings and weekends.

How big are these grad seminars? At my last department, there were about 100 grad students total and like you said, it's really hard to move TA appointments around. So instead, we move classes around. The first day of each course is usually a meeting between the prof and the students and we all decide what time to hold our lectures based on everyone's TA responsibilities and other classes (however, in the Canadian system, we only take 1 or 2 classes per semester and spread them out through our whole degree, so there's less room for conflicts). So, would it be possible for you to contact the organizer of the two grad seminars that conflict with your TA assignment to see if they can be rescheduled? (In my field, classes might have 4-5 people in total so this might not be practical if like 30 people are taking this seminar).

It also depends on the rules at your school. At my school, you can never get a PhD in less than 3 years, that's just the minimum time in residence required by school regulations.

The CGS-M is tied to the school, not the student because it is now granted by the school you applied to (i.e. you would have submitted separate applications for each school you applied to). It used to be tied to the student (and granted by SSHRC) but not anymore.

I think when people say "the Harvard of X", they might mean that "it's one of the best schools in X" because Harvard is one of the top schools in the US. So although I personally do not like the expression "the Harvard of X", I would say with my interpretation above, McGill is indeed "the Harvard of Canada" because it is one of the best schools in Canada (top 3, exact ranking depends on your field). However, "the Harvard of X" does not mean "as good as Harvard, but in another place". All Canadian research universities are public, which means that pretty much all top US schools (almost all private) will be better than the best schools in Canada. MIT is definitely a better place to be than McGill, overall (again, maybe there are some specific programs where this is not true). The way I see it, when you put Canadian and American universities on a ranking scale, I'd say the first tier (top schools) are places like Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc. and the second tier might be other strong schools but just can't quite compete with the top tier -- this list totally depends on the field of course, in mine, it would be places like U Michigan, U Maryland, U Washington, etc. I would say the best Canadian schools (McGill, Toronto, UBC) fall within this tier. You can also see this in world university rankings. These top Canadian schools are generally ranked 20th through 50th, while the "top 20" worldwide tend to be the "top tier" I mentioned above. See link: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2014-15/subject-ranking/subject/physical-sciences

You would be able to do most basic living things in Vancouver without a car if you live on a good bus route. Public transit in Vancouver might not be as good as, say, New York City, but it's certainly far better than a lot of other major metropolitan areas (e.g. Los Angeles). With public transit, most people can access things like home, work, grocery stores, going to movies/restaurants, going downtown, getting to the bank (although many major banks have branches on campus at UBC), doctors office etc. You might want a car for things that don't exist on convenient bus routes, which might include some beaches, friends' homes, speciality stores/shops, random appointments/errands that you don't do very often. But in these cases, you might be able to find a friend who can drive or bike or bus+walk or get a cab. So I would say that for everyday life, a car is not that much more convenient, but it could be really handy for errands/things you might do on a weekend. But cars are really expensive (especially parking). When I went to UBC, I lived in a suburb and although I had a car, I never drove it to school. My bus commute was 1.0-1.5 hours each way, and that was still more convenient than driving every day, dealing with the costs associated with driving and the traffic. So, since I am used to commuting, my idea of "convenient" might not be the same as yours! As for the rain, I'm not sure I'm the best person to ask either since I grew up with it so it's no big deal to me. Just make sure you have good raingear, especially boots to keep water out of your socks. I wouldn't bike in the rain but taking the bus in the rain is fine (many bus stops have covering, but good raingear is important!).

Good points I am in the "refuse to go to Graduate School unless it's fully funded" camp because I am thinking about PhD programs when I make these statements. In these programs, it is definitely the norm to fully fund students and I think that not getting a fully funded offer is kind of a red flag (that the program would make such an offer but also that it might mean your application was fairly uncompetitive). I completely agree with these sentiments though in reference to terminal Masters programs that provide a good opportunity for a good job afterwards.

At my last program, grad classes time are determined on the first day of the term, where the students and prof decide together when the class takes place. At my current program, some departments do it this way but others just depends on the professor's preference. Overall, class times between 1pm and 4pm are the most popular, and second place is the 10am to noon slot. No one wants an early or late class

If you think you might have a better fit at other schools that accepted you now, then talk to your other schools immediately. Some places (like some programs at my school) will actually allow people who they accepted in the past year to attend, even if you turned them down already.

I am married but no children. My spouse is not a student but works on campus. My daily routine is something like this: Weekdays 7AM -- wake up / morning routine 8AM -- arrive at work (I match my work schedule to my spouse's) 8AM to 5PM -- my workday (I take an hour off for lunch, usually noon-1pm; see notes below) After 5PM -- go to the gym a few days of the week, but usually make dinner, do dishes/chores etc. -- sometimes social things like dinner with people 8PM to 11PM -- generally free time where I might play games, watch TV, and do some work (I usually do my volunteering work, or homework, or grading in the evenings, but will rarely do actual work too, as needed). 11 PM -- go to bed! My weekends are unstructured but I generally do not work at all and do chores (laundry, get groceries), run errands (go to the bank, etc.) and do social things with our friends My "workday" varies a lot depends the quarter. I was fortunate enough to schedule it so that during my PhD program, I never have to teach and take classes at the same time! When I was taking classes, my work-week was something like 10 hours in classes, 30 hours of research (and probably 15 hours on homework but mostly outside of the workday). When I was teaching, it was about 10 hours per week on TA face-time and prep (attending lectures, office hours, preparation), 30 hours of research, and maybe 5-ish hours per week for grading (but this is done at home). Now I just spend all my time on "research". When I say "research", I include things like reading/writing emails to collaborators/supervisor, reading papers, writing code, running analyses, attending seminars, etc. Finally, when there are hard deadlines (grant proposals, telescope proposals), I do work a lot more. I might come home only between 5PM to 7PM in order to make dinner (I do almost all the cooking in my family), eat it, clean up, and then I'm back at work until 11PM or so. Once in awhile, I push myself and work until 1AM or 2AM, but I often find that although I might get a little bit more done in the extra 2 hours, my body can't really handle it and I lose much more than 2 hours of productivity on the next day. Sadly, I'm not as resilient as I was in undergrad!! And, since I am an observational astronomer, I also have a few night shifts where I observe on the telescope all night (generally 8PM to 8AM). This happens on average once per month and I adjust my work schedule that week to accommodate the shift but it does throw a few things off.

Glad to hear there is a resolution. I was going to say that you shouldn't be talking to the Admissions Office, talk directly to the International Students Office when I read your first post today but then I saw that's exactly what you did next! Hope your I-20 gets there soon!!

Although some Canadian schools do follow US conventions such as the April 15 thing

It's not a big deal for you to withdraw the paper at this point. Revise and resubmit requests are "optional" in the sense that you can choose to not revise and not have it published. So, I think it's really up to you at this point to decide whether or not you want to spend the time to revise it. It's up to you to determine whether it's worth it or not!

Just to clarify, this is not your own funds (in fact, as I wrote above, it cannot be mostly your own funds!). In my field, most PhD programs come with funding conditionally guaranteed (i.e. "satisfactory progress") for the entire length of degree, and this is good enough (at this school anyways) to issue a DS-2019. This is because the only way you would not get future funding is that if they kick you out, which would end your J-1 status anyways.

I'm not familiar with how this prep software works, but if multiple attempts at a practice test result in the same score, maybe you should be more strategic and pinpoint why you are not getting past 159. I think practice test fatigue can play a factor, so maybe try one of the following: 1. Take a few days off and then take a practice test again. 2. Can your test software tell you what types of questions you are missing, rather than just which questions? If not, can you examine all of the questions that you miss and categorize them into the various "types"and then work on improving that aspect?

It's hard to tell. It might be a silent rejection or a "currently silent" rejection. Since I'd imagine April 15 and the days following it are extremely busy, the schools might wait until all of that is resolved before sending official rejection notices. It could also be that you are now currently being considered for a late offer. The deadline for students to respond is April 15 and while some schools do have a plan in place if Student X declines, we'll make an offer to Student Y immediately, other schools might take a few days to assess who accepted and who declined and then make a round of late offers. So, for schools with April 15 deadlines, I'd expect the last set of offers to be made in the ~1 week or so following. And finally, you might be next on the waitlist but a few people might have asked for an extension of a couple of days because they are also waiting for another school etc.

It sounds to me like you and the other 4 or 5 people are right in the borderline of accept/not-accept and the profs are probably waiting to hear from their current outstanding offers to decide how many more offers to make.

Oh -- I forgot to add: Another disadvantage/difference with J-1 is that the financial support requirements are different. F-1: You need to show enough funds to cover yourself and your dependents for 1 year (funds can come from any source--personal, TA, RA, fellowship, family, government etc.). J-1: You need to show enough funds to cover yourself and your dependents for entire length of degree. Also, the "majority" of the funds must not come from personal sources (i.e. not out of your savings or your family savings, but from the University or fellowships or government). No clear definition on what "majority" means though--some schools interpret it as 50%. It's up to the school to decide whether or not they will sponsor you. Yes, it is theoretically possible to change status from F-1 to J-1. However, it is not allowed for J-1s with the 2-year home residency requirement to change to any other status unless a waiver on that requirement has been granted. That said, I get the impression that it is very difficult to make this change and you will have to have a good reason for US Immigration as to why you didn't start with J-1 in the first place. Specifically, one school's website says that US Immigration will reject your request if they think that the primary reason for the change is so that your dependents can attain permission to work in the US. Website: http://internationalcenter.umich.edu/immig/jvisa/j_chngstatus.html Since having dependents work in the US is really the only reason I think most people need J-1, I don't see an advantage to starting as F-1 and then switching to J-1. The only possible thing I can think of is that you don't have funding for all years yet but this will still make the J-1 transfer very difficult. You're welcome Good luck!! That's a common misconception! J-1 PhD students are rare but we exist (usually exchange students or postdocs are on J-1). It's confusing because there are about a dozen different types of J-1 statuses, such as high school exchange student, au-pair, camp counselor, postdocs, visiting scholars, and PhD students! However, it's each school's prerogative to decide whether or not to sponsor you for J-1 status (i.e. by issuing the DS-2019). Schools are not required to sponsor you on J-1 status even if you meet all of the J-1 requirements set by the Department of State. So at some schools, they might tell you that J-1 is only for their exchange students or postdocs because they do not want to sponsor PhD students on J-1. I encountered this at the University of Arizona and that played a big role in my final decision. If you are interested in J-1, you should talk to the schools' international offices as you are making your final decision. My current school also helped students with spouses complete the paperwork necessary to obtain employment authorization for our spouses (it takes about 3-4 months to process).

I am a Canadian on J-1 status. Most students are on F-1 status. There are a few differences, but ultimately, it really boils down to this: If you have a spouse who will move with you to the US and your spouse wants to be able to work, get the J-1 status. Otherwise, get F-1. That is really the only reason to get J-1. There is no difference in the number of entries you get with J-1 vs. F-1. As a Canadian, we do not need a F-1/J-1 visa (i.e. a page in our passport) to enter the US, we can enter as often as we want. However, we do need to maintain F-1/J-1 status (Form I-20 or DS-2019) in order to remain in the US for studying. Other than the spouse working issue, the second biggest difference is the 2-year home residency requirement. If you get an NSERC (home government funding) then you will be subject to this requirement. I have a NSERC PGS-D right now and my DS-2019 has the "home government funding" box ticked off. The requirement means that you must live in Canada for 2 years before you can immigrate to the US. You don't have to go back to Canada right away, just before you immigrate to the US. You also don't have to leave the US. J-1 students can undergo 2-3 years of "Academic Training" (AT) right after their PhD if they get work in their field of study (e.g. a postdoc). This is an extension of your J-1 status. Note: F-1 students have the same benefit, it's just called OPT. Finally, the last difference that I can think of is that J-1 students must maintain a minimum level of health insurance in the US for themselves and their dependents. You must explicitly get insurance that will repatriate your remains to Canada if anything happens to you. Gruesome, but legally required! Overall, as you might notice, there are far more disadvantages/requirements for J-1 than F-1. However, the one advantage for J-1, that your spouse can work, is a huge one and for most people, more than makes up for the disadvantages. This is why I say that the only reason to choose J-1 is if you have a spouse that wants to work in the US (and your spouse cannot get their own work authorization).

Just to play devil's advocate -- if you aren't competitive enough to get the funded grad school positions now, what makes you think you'll be competitive enough for jobs later? To be clear, I agree that in some specific cases (like the one teddybrosevelt outlined above), choosing to take on (more) debt for the opportunity to earn a lot more later might make sense. This is why lawyers and doctors pay their own way through law and med school. But I don't think it's a sound leap to go from "funding for grad school is really competitive, so I might not get funding now but it will pay off later" because later job searches will also be competitive!