TakeruK

My only experience with grad admission fairs are for Canadian programs so it might be a little different but I'll share my experience anyways! In Canada, there is an annual nation-wide undergraduate research conference for physics students and one of the events during this conference is a grad school fair. It is an event that lasts for an afternoon and basically every graduate physics program in Canada is represented (the fees that the schools pay to be at the fair help fund a big portion of the conference cost). Also, there are about a few dozen schools with graduate physics programs in Canada, so it's possible to fit them all into one room! I found the experience extremely helpful. I attended the conference twice, in my last two years of undergrad and the grad fair was helpful both times. The first time, it was helpful to know what programs are out there, and what they specialize in. For example, in the Eastern "Maritime" parts of Canada, it turns out that the physics programs there are small so that they got together and divided up the subfields amongst each school. This results in there being only one viable choice in that region for each subfield (they did this so that with their limited resources, each school could be competitive in their chosen subfield instead of being mediocre at everything). Also, in the year I was applying to graduate school, it was very helpful to meet the people from that school. I am not sure how grad fairs in the US work, but at this Canadian conference grad fair, each booth was usually staffed by the Department's Director of Graduate Studies, one other professors, and one or two current grad students from that program. It's a good way to introduce yourself to the DGS and also get to meet some professors and students. It's basically like a mini visit weekend, but conducted in like 15 minutes! Finally, in the Canadian system, new grad students are almost hired directly by their supervisors, so it's a lot like a job fair too. Each school usually has brochures that generally describe their program and usually also an insert/leaflet that changes each year which describes specifically which professors/projects are looking for new students. Or you can talk to the prof there and find out! Oh and also they give out a lot of free stuff So, if the grad fair is something like the above, I'd say it's totally worth your time. I know the schools like the fair too (and they also attend the student talks at the conference to scout out the up and coming students!)

I think it should be okay as long as the school does not specifically instruct you not to do this. Just a warning since some schools I applied to explicitly told us not to include URLs anywhere. However, I think if you follow the instructions, including a URL as a footer might not be standard, but it should be okay. Not sure if anyone would actually look at it, but it's possible. I know sometimes admissions committee will do a google lookup on you so it's a good idea to make sure the google search for "Your name + your field" comes up with your homepage, if possible.

I agree with bsharpe, my LOR writers appreciated knowing the names of professors I wanted to work with at each school (both so that they can write their letters targeted at these people as well as to give me their thoughts on those professors). But the best way to make sure you know what your prof means is to talk to them in person. If you are not able to come visit the prof, I would say something like "The instructions ask that the letters be addressed to `Admissions Committee' and I am interested in working with Profs X, Y, and Z at the school". That way you cover both! Also, even if your prof addresses the letter to "Profs X, Y and Z" instead of "Admissions Committee", it's not going to reflect poorly on you either, so I wouldn't worry about it too much and just give the names to your prof!

Not weird at all. In my field, students often do a summer research project at schools other than their undergrad and their supervisors would definitely be writing LORs for them. And, since they know the school well, they probably will apply to at least one of the schools they've worked at. In my current program, I'd say about between 25% and 40% of admitted students spent some time at my school as an undergrad before (i.e. they would have a LOR from a prof in the program).

true for many values of X

I don't think this changes anything.

I think this is tough. First, I would make sure to check the application instructions carefully. Some schools explicitly instructed me to not include any outside material whatsoever, including hyperlinks. But other schools also stated I must include hyperlinks to e.g. any papers mentioned in my bibliography etc. Other than that, I think you have to judge what the school wants and go with whatever advice you can get about the particular program you are applying to. Someone was successfully admitted to my current program with a very non-standard SOP -- it included some funny pictures of their experience and was very creative rather than the standard direct approach used in science SOPs. Finally, I just want to add that you should rely on readers visiting the hyperlinks as little as possible. Make sure your SOP still presents a strong argument even without the external material.

I would say that in most cases, it makes sense for you to apply to grad school without telling your brand new boss that you are doing so. In your shoes, I would only tell my new employer if there was some requirement in your job contract (but more for future professional contact rather than worrying about them "telling" on your new school) or if you wanted your new boss to write a LOR (although they might not be able to be very helpful). So, unless you have reason to believe otherwise, I don't think you need to worry about your boss doing this. Even if they did, I don't think your new school will care that you didn't tell your old boss that you were applying to grad school.

I agree with Dedi. In addition, if the point of writing well in your SOP is to show the school that you have good command of the English language, I don't think inserting correct but non-standard English words is going to help. Native English speakers don't write or speak this way and I agree with you that the forced vocabulary is hindering your ability to get your point across.

I didn't know there could be a negative too until I read these forums and found that different countries and different fields have different expectations! In Canada, in my field, we are admitted directly to work with a professor so it's more like a job hire than anything else so I think it's natural to introduce yourself rather than just to submit your application. After all, if I was a professor, I would want to make my decision based on how well I get along with a potential student / how comfortable I feel working with them, not just what their GPAs and GREs say. However, after being exposed to more fields/programs on these forums, I found out that 1) some US programs generally admit students via committee, and usually not directly to work with individual professors (i.e. they just admit the best X students) and 2) some fields explicitly tell applicants to NOT contact professors beforehand. I think that's strange but that's the way things are!

I have a 13" Macbook Pro for home / personal use. I used to rely on it for a lot of work use too when I had a crappy computer at work. I find 13" more than enough for entertainment (which is mostly web browsing and Netflix). I find that the increase in price to 15" is not worth it, and here is what I suggest instead: For home entertainment, instead of spending the ~$500 or so to go from 13" MBP to 15" MBP, invest that money into a projector instead. My wife and I recently purchased one (using points so it was free, but it would be less than $500 normally) over the summer and we just plug our 13" MBP into it and now have Netflix on a much bigger screen than 15" !! For work, I would say that neither 13" nor 15" is big enough. But I would also say that we should not be responsible for buying our own work computers! I am currently working on a 27" iMac at work and it is a great size. My old work computer was very slow but it still had a 32" monitor. I guess it depends on what you do, but for my work, I think it would be tough to work on anything smaller than 21" and most students have at least two 17" monitors side by side.

I included these things on my CV. I put them in a section called "Service and Leadership" or "Service and other experiences" depending on what I actually included and what my goal for the CV was. In this category, I have some academic related stuff (undergrad research journal editing, VP for student physics society), as well as non-academic but service stuff (student government, TA labour union) and even community service (teaching at youth groups etc.). I put them in mostly to show the reader that I am a well rounded person with many priorities outside of research and academics. If the reader is looking for signs of well-roundedness, then yay! If the reader is going to consider these aspects as negative (e.g. "oh TakeruK was involved in a labour union? we don't want him!!") then that's okay because I don't want them either

Yes, you should still email and introduce yourself. Going "on leave" can mean a lot of different things to different professors. Some profs go "on leave" and basically just disappear (more common if they have no current students while on leave) and others still come into work every day but just do not teach or sit on committees. And for some others, "on leave" might actually mean they are trying out a different job at a different school and would only return if the new job doesn't work out. So it would make a lot of sense to email the prof and express your interest in working with him and see what he says. The other thing I'd keep in mind is that it's not too rare for one's supervisor to be away for some time during one's degree. And it might even be better for them to be away in the beginning rather than when you are trying to finish!

One common topic of discussion here is whether or not it is a good idea to write to POIs prior to applying and/or what to say in these types of emails. I saw a professor give her point of view on a blog I regularly follow and thought I would share it here since it might be of interest to some forum members! Blog post: http://tenureshewrote.wordpress.com/2014/10/02/grad-student-mentorship/ Of course, this is probably something that varies a lot from field to field, program to program and even probably person to person. This is a pseudoanonymous blog (the author did identify herself as a new professor in the sciences though). And there are many other threads here with links to other articles on this topic--this is not meant to give "the" answer, just wanted to bring attention to an interesting blog post that I hope is timely for those who are applying this season.

This might really depend on the field/program. However, most programs in my field (including my current program) do reviews of all the applications at once, not as they come in. This is because grad admissions are usually competitive and applicants are ranked against each other so you need to see most, if not all, of your applicants before you can decide. So, in most programs in my field, the deadlines are sometime in December or early January. A staff admin person will compile applications and make sure they are all complete, etc. Then, some time after the deadline (usually weeks later), the admission committees will begin to review applications, have meetings to discuss applications and make decisions. So, for most programs in my field, it makes no difference whether you submit them now or 1 second before the deadline (well, respect for Murphy's law means you should try to avoid submitting the night of the deadline). In fact, I would even say you have nothing to gain by submitting your application this early. For most of my applications, I submitted them one or two days before the deadline. I did make a few "last minute" changes--in late November, I decided to apply to an extra school and in late December, I decided against applying to a school about a week before the deadline. I do think the relief of finishing/submitting an application is valuable, but months ahead of time is too much time for me. I would be more comfortable with submitting 1 or 2 weeks early.

My range of deadlines was Dec 1 through Feb 1, so not as long as yours were. I don't think they were upset because professors generally write LORs over a 6 month period anyways. Most postdoc applications are due between Oct 1 and Dec 1, then US grad schools usually Dec 1 to Jan 1 and most Canadian schools between Jan 1 and Mar 1.

Here are my thoughts: Professors do prefer to fill out the forms at once but December to May is a huge difference. Maybe your program is different but you will likely hear back from the December 2014 deadline school before you even reach the May 2015 deadline. Personally, I separated the LOR request into two phases. The first phase was the initial request / heads up that I would like them to write letters. This happened around this time of year in 2011 for me. I informally asked them if they would agree to write a letter. By the end of October, I had a one page summary document with my info at the top and then a list of schools, sorted by due date, and also a few names of people I wanted to work with. The second phase is submitting the actual request from the application itself. My LOR writers let me know that they would likely not be submitting the LORs until the deadlines were closer (since they are busy with classes in the fall). I made the formal submission of their name to the application about 1 month before the due date which generates an automatic email. I did this in batches--so I did one on Nov 1 for schools due between Dec 1 and Dec 15, one batch on Nov 15 for schools due between Dec 15 and Dec 31, and one final batch on December 1 for schools due after Jan 1. I chose to do them in waves so that the profs won't get all 8 schools at once but also won't get 8 sporadic emails. Also I figured that the Nov 15 batch would remind them that I had submitted an earlier batch a couple of weeks ago. I sent another reminder (through the application's reminder system) about 2 days prior to the due date. For most letters, I got them either on the due date, or about 2-3 days after the due date (it's almost never a problem).

My advice is to have a backup plan (e.g. side project) in case this high risk, high reward project doesn't pan out. These projects are not considered "high risk" for nothing! I chose to try one such project in my first year and also had another project that was also interesting but less risky (our program has us trying two projects in year one). Actually, after starting both, I found myself much more invested and interested in the second project. In the end, my "high risk high reward" project didn't work out (basically, someone else found the solution first). But it was still a good experience overall because I learned a lot and I am making good progress on my main project. Don't let a difficult problem discourage you but you need to also think of your future career--you don't want to sink many years of grad school into a project that results in very little rewards. In reality, more established researchers generally have more resources and more ability to absorb risk so they are better equipped to tackle high risk high reward type projects. So, my advice would be for grad students to take on these projects as side projects rather than hoping they will be the lucky one to make it happen.

I would have made the same suggestion as fuzzy but with the new information, I'm not sure how useful it would be to have two letters from the same research group, unless you worked on fairly different projects with the professor than the postdoc. But you did say that you are not worried about the overlap so it might not be a problem. How about asking the postdoc and the postdoc's supervisor for their thoughts? If I were in your shoes, one option I might follow is to ask the postdoc's supervisor (also your supervisor right?) to include the postdoc's assessment of you in their LOR as well and then ask the prof that taught you to write you the third LOR. While research LORs are better than academic LORs, having 2 out of 3 research LORs is pretty good still. This is because I would be concerned that the postdoc does not have enough experience/reputation/respect (only 1 year after PhD, you said) to influence the admission committee. However, if this postdoc is a superstar that everyone knows their work then that might be a different story!

Not to mention in contradiction to all of the trouble US Immigration goes through to ensure that foreign students are not intending to become permanent residents (it's perfectly fine if we do, but one of the requirements for the F-1/J-1 visa is proof that you are only in the US for school and that you have intentions to return home after you are done).

I should clarify that it's two hours "extra" to apply to, say, school #2 given that I already finished applying to school #1. The first application does take a really long time to finish, but the additional "cost" for another school is small! I was lucky that only 2 schools (out of 8) had "different" application criteria (one limited the SOP to 500 words and another wanted 4 different PDFs instead of one CV file). Although I don't have children, my spouse (not a student) had some of the same concerns as you did. Being Canadian, finding a school that will sponsor me for a J-1 exchange visa (instead of the standard F-1 student visa) was also important so that my spouse can be allowed to work in the US. Even so, for the two of us to fly out and visit each location, it would easily cost over $1000. I applied to 8 schools in total (one Canadian one that we already visited) so vetting each of these schools before applying would have cost $5000+ probably! So, we went with the "shotgun" approach of applying to more schools and then vetting them on the school's money! Most of the schools we visited involved my spouse in the visit day as well and gave her some work space while I interviewed with professors and/or gave her some guidance on what to see in the town. And most programs made an effort to connect us to other grad students with families so that we can get a good sense of what our life might be like there. Finally, we did a lot of prior research and decision making (as much as we could) prior to my applications. I first made a list of all the schools that had research interests that fit me. Then both my spouse and I crossed off any school where either one of us felt like we would be unhappy in that location (either culture, climate, job opportunities etc.). We tried our best to not make it like the person doing the "veto" had to "defend" their action to the other--the school only stayed on the list if we both approved it! We did also try to keep an open mind and lean towards acceptance than veto since we know that our preconceptions of a place might be distorted. This was how we created our list of 8 schools and then after the schools made their decisions, we visited the schools (a few I had to do on my own) and then made our final ranking. It turns out that our top 3 choices in our ranking were exactly the same, so the final decision was easy

In my field, when it comes to personal interactions, professors treat new students with the same respect they would treat anyone else. That is, they don't hold their "rank" over other (more junior) professors, or postdocs, or students. So, something like ripping up homework, or personal insults would be completely inappropriate and unacceptable. That said, although my field (and I think much of science) do have the approach that ideas are only judged on academic merit, not personality, most profs will be more skeptical of a "crazy new idea" from a grad student than if it came from an established faculty member. That is, I do second Eigen's statement that respect for one's academic abilities is something that is earned over time. But, basic person-to-person interactions respect should always be there, no matter your academic reputation/rank. I have no idea what the norms in your field are when it comes to things like ripping up homework / respect for one another etc. In my opinion, this should have no place in any university no matter the field. Even though I know I am an outsider to the field, if this kind of action is normal in MFA programs, I would advocate for the University to take actions against this program to not allow this kind of action. I understand that some fields just do some things differently, but I would argue that no field should have the privilege of professors destroying their student's work.

These are all valid points, but ultimately, it's a matter of cost / return on investment. That is, I would definitely agree with visiting the school and the area and making sure you're okay with living there but only after you have an offer. There's no point visiting the place and then finding out you didn't get in! Personally, I would rather pay $100 or so to apply to the school and then have them fly me out to visit than to do my visit pre-application (and spending hundreds of my own dollars). As for the second point, it's true that it would waste time applying to a place that turns out to be a terrible fit. However, the marginal cost in applying to another school is very small. It takes me maybe 2 more hours to prepare another application and I know it takes my recommenders approximately 10 more minutes to submit another LOR (for many schools, they send you an email when your prof submits a LOR and for some of my profs, I got them 5-10 minutes one after another, which is approximately the time it takes for the prof to log into the system, copy-paste their letter, change the name of the school and click submit). So, while I totally agree with what you say about making sure you end up at a school/location you are comfortable with, my recommendation (for my field) is to apply to more schools and visit later, rather than visiting first and then only applying to the best fits. It will minimize your out of pocket cost and also increase your chances of finding a great fit (unless you can afford to visit every program you might be interested in). Also, I think it would be absolutely heart breaking to visit a school, strike up a great connection with the prof, fall in love with the city and then not get in

I'm starting to see maybe 5% to 10% of the posters at conferences are fabric. I've seen a Spoonflower (what I linked above) poster in person--my friend here made his poster with that and it looks great. The recommended fabric "performance knit" does not look like a flag at all. If the poster is far away, what you could do is just ask for a test swatch. Or even just order it early and if it's terrible, you can still do the standard paper poster. But I can personally vouch for Spoonflower's performance knit fabric as good for poster printing! I really wanted to print my last poster on this but I didn't get it finished 2-3 weeks in advance! For these type of services, it's really meant for users to upload their own design to create clothes/drapes etc. but the pattern is just your poster! You can order just 1 yard, which is about the size of a conference poster Or, you can order several yards and make something out of your research!! (My goal one day!)

I agree with bsharpe--sometimes professors extend invitations without really thinking about the cost (in time and money) for applicants to visit, or they are just extending it in case you are in the area. In my opinion, you can tell when a professor is serious about wanting to meet with you when they also offer to reimburse your travel expenses. Sometimes they don't say this up front, so I think one good way to inquire about it without directly asking for money is something like: "Thank you for the offer to visit your school. Although I appreciate your invitation, a trip out to the west coast at this point is beyond my budget." If you want, you could add some sentence about being happy to visit if you get an interview or admission offer though. I realise that I don't really know what field you are in. Almost all of the above was written from the point of view of someone in the physical sciences, where schools will pay for (at least some) travel costs related to recruitment weekends and even interview visits (although most programs will prefer to interview via skype or telephone to save money). I guess it's possible that you are in a field where it's the norm to expect students to absorb costs related to admission, so then the above advice might not be as applicable. But in the sciences, the only cost you should expect to pay are the application fees, transcript fees and test scores.