TakeruK

I'd take it unless you have your heart set on academia/research and you are 100% sure you want to do that, and you know all the risks and hardships that comes with finding a research/academia job! Personally, I would take it, because it's both more money and a guaranteed job after graduation. But I think the real question is why are you doing a PhD? Is it for a career in the field? If so, this sounds like a great opportunity! But if you are truly interested in doing post-docs after your PhD etc. then you would want to keep your options more open. I think you could probably still get a research position after working for this company for 4 years though but maybe others in the field can answer it better. Congrats on the opportunity, either way, though!

It's not ideal, but not so frowned upon that your application would be immediately rejected! If it's your only work experience and the only way you can get 3 LORs, then make the best of it -- it's good that the letter writers will say different things about you. But you say you have worked at the lab for 2 years now. Have you been doing the same project for 2 whole years?? If not, I would actually count each project as a separate line/entry in your CV and have one LOR writer talk about one project while another could talk about a different project. Having your third LOR be a course-related LOR isn't ideal but to make the most of it, choose carefully! When I used a course-related LOR, I actually emailed the prof with a list of schools I'm applying to. He then let me know where he thought his letter could help (I have a good enough relationship with him to ask this!). It's helpful if the prof has a connection with a school (e.g. alma mater, did grad school with faculty there, has sent previous students there and can compare you favourably to them), so maybe you could pick 2 or 3 potential course-related LOR writers and try to find the best match for each school!

It doesn't matter who paid for the experiments, if you are the first author and you wrote the manuscript yourself, you have full control over the submission process. You can't buy control of a paper with money. Of course, it would be a very bad idea to submit work with other people's names on it without their approval, but if you say, give people 2 months to look over and say that if you hear nothing, you will assume approval, then you can probably go ahead. If they end up objecting and if you really think you have good work, well then they can withdraw their name from the paper and you would have to remove the work that they did (if any). If it's good work, it will pass peer review and be published.

Here's my opinion! The best LORs are those written from someone who has supervised your research work and can talk about your research ability. Sometimes LORs for physical sciences are partly a form that the prof fills out, with some free space for writing whatever they want. In the form section, the prof rates you on several skills such as "communication", "work ethic", "research potential", "ability to do independent work", "academic achievement" etc. You are not rated on a 1-5 scale though, the prof usually ticks off a box that could have options like "Top 1%" "Top 2%" "Top 5%", "Top 10%", "Top 50%" OR "best student of this year", "best student of this decade", "best student I've ever met", etc. Basically, you want a LOR that will COMPARE you favourably to other students. Committees do not seem to be interested in statements like "Student X has a strong GPA" -- they can see this on the transcript and almost everyone will have good GPAs. They want to hear statements like "Student X is ranked 3rd out of 200 students in his class at School A". Next, the reputation of the professor and the school is important. Clearly, even if a famous prof ranks you at only top 10%, it's better than an unknown person (or new person) saying you are in the top 5% or something. In addition, you should consider the reputation of the LOR writer in terms of the school you are applying to. If you are applying to someone's alma mater, especially if you are applying to their former colleague, advisor, or someone they went to grad school with! Or, if there are students formerly at your school who ended up going to the new school, your LOR could contain statements that compare you to these already accepted students -- obviously you want to make sure there are favourable comparisons. It's hard to know all the connections between profs and schools, so I just simply asked my potential LOR writers. I had 3 LORs from research work and for some schools, I sent an extra LOR from a prof here that has taught many of my core courses and knows my ability well. I sent a list of schools I was applying to and asked that 4th prof to let me know if he thought a letter from him would help me. It turns out that he was personal friends (went to grad school with) people at one of the schools and had sent his former students to another. I wouldn't have known these things without asking! Finally, you should always ask the person if they want to write you a LOR with enough time to find another person if they don't want to do it. Some people will ask outright whether or not they will write a strong LOR, but if you ask them if they think/want to write one for you, then it's less direct. Usually most profs will let you know at this point if they don't think they can write you a strong LOR -- if so, it's probably best to find someone else if possible! So the three key ideas are that: 1. You want your LORs to come from people you've worked with in research. Coursework LORs are sometimes necessary though since it's hard to get 3 research supervisors by the time you apply. 2. Every good student will have the necessary skills of a graduate student. Strong LORs will compare you favourably amongst your peers, and make you stand out. 3. An LOR from someone that the committee knows will be stronger than an endorsement from someone they don't know.

I've always learned that the class has to "buy into" the rules you set. So, the first week would be a great time to have a class discussion on what the rules should be. My only concern about laptops is that they distract other students. I don't care if the student isn't paying attention in class or not participating -- it's their loss and it will show up in their participation grades. However, it becomes my concern when it affects other students. So, if the class decides that laptops are too distracting, then we could all agree to not use them. On the other hand, if the class prefers to have laptops and the potential distraction, then it's their choice too. Someone else said that hard copy notes and annotating is preferred. I feel that we should be pushing for more "green" classes where possible. I email all handouts to the students or post them on the website for them to use / take notes in with their laptops (or on a separate piece of paper). The students who want a hard copy can choose to print it themselves. When I do make photocopies of things for classes, I always end up with too many (cause you don't want to leave someone out!) and it's a waste of paper, especially if the student is just going to stick it in their binder and never look at it again. There are several post-secondary schools now that are heading towards this technology route, even issuing every single student and instructor with a laptop. There are web forums for each class and students are supposed to use their laptops during lectures to answer "clicker" questions etc. Sometimes students have electronic versions of their books that they prefer to read instead of print versions. I think it's easy for Universities to use much more paper than is necessary so any way to cut back is a good idea.

I got the OGS last year (and declined it this year so hopefully it will go to a wait-lister!). Our graduate program secretary asked us to inform her ASAP because our school has a policy that you cannot be eligible for internal awards unless you apply to all the external ones (NSERC, OGS). So, it's good to tell them right away (good or bad) so that they can start nominating and putting together award applications to your school's internal awards. In addition, the OGS result affects your financial package so you probably want to get the info to them sooner rather than later!

Unfortunately, I think that your ranking compared to not only students in your current class, but all students this prof ever taught, is the most important thing in a LOR from a prof you took a course with. Even for a prof you did research with, the LOR would typically make a statement like "This student is in the top X percentile of all students I have ever worked with", or something like that. I've seen some LORs where the school wants the prof to fill out a fill boxes before actually writing a normal letter. These boxes generally ask the writer to rank the student in several skills such as innovation, communication, research potential etc. and the boxes to tick off are generally Top 1%, Top 5%, Top 10%, Top 50%. If you are asking about the Putnam ranking though, I don't know if that's very important. I saw in another thread that a math grad student said it's not important. So you should definitely talk to the prof about this. He/She would be able to confirm if this year's class was especially bright, so that while they might not be able to say you are in the top X percent of this year's class, you might still rank favourably amongst a more typical class. I don't want to discourage you, but ideally, a LOR should say more than just "student did well in the course and works hard" and that you're a good person etc. This doesn't provide much more information than your transcript. It's not like a job application where reference letters are used to confirm that you are a good worker -- these LORs are used "competitively" and you want them to show that you are not only a good worker, but a better student than other people who are applying. So you really do want them to at least say you are in the top 50% of students they've taught. However, you said that this prof works with/teaches many bright students so being in the top 50% of this pool is probably pretty good still. The prof might be pretty well known -- that could count for more than a glowing LOR from an unknown prof. And it will be a stronger LOR once you have taken 2 courses with the prof. Again, I don't want to say that this LOR won't be good enough -- I don't know all the details, and I don't want to come off as elitist because I know it's really hard to get great LORs. It sounds like this LOR could be pretty good but if you have another option that fits better, maybe you should consider that too! Finally, I didn't send the same LORs to all the schools I applied to. My research related LORs went to all the schools, but I chose my course-releated LORs to fit each school. For example, I chose one LOR writer because they are an alumni of that school, have collaborators in the school, or have had former students that they can compare me favourably to attending that school. Most of this information I only found out when asking (I sent the list of schools to the person and asked if they thought I could benefit from a letter from them). EDIT: PS -- unless you know for sure how you ranked, after talking to the prof you might find out that you did better than you thought! So you might not have anything to worry about

You might not have TA work during the exams period -- but it depends on your position whether you will be involved in exam marking or not (e.g. if you supervise labs, then you are probably finished by the last week of classes). But most schools have more than just 4-5 days between semesters -- what about the undergrads? How do they get a Christmas break if there are only 4-5 days between semesters?

I think it is weird, but maybe not in your field? In the sciences, not everyone will get an oral presentation slot -- if you don't, you usually present a poster instead, where some people do have copies of their paper on hand (or uploaded and a URL provided). There is also usually a poster session on one or more evenings, with food and drinks and everyone has a chance to come by and see your poster (but most won't). But I haven't ever seen a conference where someone just hands out copies of their paper without any kind of presentation at all! If you don't get funding, it's probably not worth it, unless you are in the last year of your degree and you REALLY think getting out there will strongly increase your chances at employment. If you do get funding, it might still be worth it to go IF it's a good conference where you can make some connections or collaborations. Otherwise, maybe wait (and save your funding) until there is another conference closer to home. I think most fields have a national society/association which has an annual meeting of its members and that's usually a good idea to go to at some point during your grad career (maybe not every year since a field-wide meeting may be too general but this means lots of people to meet).

Also, questions about your age, martial status, gender, ethnicity, family status, sexual orientation and similar subjects are illegal job interview questions in Canada (and probably the US; unless the job specifically needs this information, e.g. actors) so it's something you really shouldn't put in a North American CV. Applying to grad school is not the same as a job, but I think these principles would apply (although schools will allow you to choose to disclose gender or ethnicity if it could benefit you). I've seen some CVs of profs posted with details like "Born 1955, married, 2 children" and stuff like that -- maybe that's something they want to share on their research websites but it's not something that applicants should share when applying for school or jobs. I also see some international CVs be a literal description of the person's whole life (i.e. a biography) with information about elementary school, high school etc. In North America, a CV is less detailed and focuses only on information relevant to your application (i.e. you don't have to include small odd jobs you might have had as a teenager if you don't want to). Finally, entering a US grad program at 22 years old is not really that unique (no offense). US students that enter a PhD program directly are usually ~21 years of age and the 1-2 years difference for a masters degree is negligible.

I think if you choose to take an extra year, you should be choosing it because you want to do more research not courses, but you could/should probably just take 1-2 graduate courses anyways just to get acquainted with the level of coursework -- but definitely spend the majority of your time on research not more courses. This sounds like what you were thinking anyways, though! When I asked what do you want, I meant something more short-term! I meant that it doesn't seem like you will need the extra year to strengthen your application. I'm sure the extra year will help, but it comes at the cost of another year (which may not be a big deal since it's just 1 year). So, if you are anxious to leave / want to go to grad school now etc. but feel like you "should" stay another year, then don't do it. If you want to stay and like the idea of the getting more research done, or maybe you have other reasons to stay in the same city for another year, then do it! Same thing for the one-year research appointments at national labs, if you like the idea of doing that, then apply for it! Having a national lab posting might make your application more interesting than an extra year of undergrad research, but I think they would be worth the same in terms of research experience gained. But if you don't feel comfortable starting/applying to grad school right now but also don't want to stay in the same school/place for another year, it could be a good compromise. Basically, I don't think you are in a position where you have to take an extra year. If you are worried about getting into a school, then maybe it's best to do so for your own peace of mind / confidence. But a year of grad school can be just as helpful for your learning/experience as another year of undergrad. So you can do what you want

I think people are usually able to get home at least once a year, during the summer and/or winter breaks. For the last 2 years, we lived across the country, so while it was not a transatlantic flight, the costs and time were just marginally less than flying to Europe! During the last 2 years, we have gone home 3 times, each for about 8-10 days. This all happened in the first year but we also went home to plan and be in our wedding! We had originally planned on 3 trips home during the whole 2 year MSc degree. It depends on your program and your advisor how often/long you can go home. I know some grad students who go home for 1-2 months every summer and work remotely (for one student, their advisor also takes off for 2 months in the summer so there is really no reason for them to stay). I don't think 3 weeks is too much time if you will also be working a bit during this time. I think it's fair to take 2-3 full weeks off total during the year of no working at all, but 3 weeks all at once could be harmful to your progress if you don't do some work remotely too. I think advisors understand that we would want to do longer visits if you are traveling further (i.e. international). But if this is important to you, you should talk to potential advisors about this before deciding on one. I know I screen my potential advisors as much as they screen me as an applicant -- i.e. would they be sympathetic towards my own family-focused goals, do they have hobbies/interests outside of research, etc. When talking with a potential advisor, I think it's important to steer the conversation away from academia after some point to really know if you can get along with them as a person as well as a research advisor!

It doesn't sound like an extra year will for sure help you in grad school applications. But I don't think it can hurt you in any way. Probably the most important thing to do in the extra year is to do research. Your chemistry research experience WILL help you for math grad school. It won't help as much as math research experience, but research experience is research experience. One of my schools that accepted me told me that they liked the fact that I had research experience in medical physics even though I was an astronomy major and applying to a planetary science program. Grad courses are nice but I don't know if they are super helpful. I took one in my last year of undergrad (I did 5 years too, but I was in a co-op program that included 16 months of full time research experience) from my honours thesis supervisor and I had the option of taking it as an actual grad course or just auditing. My advisor told me that taking it as a grad course won't really help me unless I do really well (i.e. better than the grad students) so he can mention it in his letter. Otherwise, it's just another course amongst many. You won't be able to count grad courses taken as part of your undergrad degree towards a PhD. But it could help you in preparing yourself for the grad school experience and interactions with grad students could also be helpful. So really, it all comes down to whether or not you want to spend an extra year or not. It doesn't really sound like you NEED another year for your application but I don't really know you. It wouldn't hurt you but it's not clear how much it will help you directly. So what do you WANT to do?

Since I read the PPS.....things could take 2+ months to process -- the first school I applied to (Dec 1 deadline) was the last school I heard from (Feb 25 or so). Also, they might have made a decision to waitlist so they could be waiting on another student to decide before either giving you the spot or rejecting you outright. Some schools also will never reject anyone, just leave you in limbo forever. I wish they wouldn't do that and that they inform students of waitlist status, but there's nothing you can really do unfortunately.

Note: for international students, usually the International Student Orientation day is actually mandatory. I don't know if it's ever been done, but the International Student Office websites imply that our visas are conditional on attending these events. But this doesn't actually occur until a week or two before the term starts, not in the early summer.

Agree with Eigen and others that suggest that using reply-all for unknown people is always really bad and to make a quick and sincere apology. I think (speculation) that since the director originally sent the mass email, and unwittingly provided everyone's email addresses to you (should have used BCC), that the director is responsible for your indiscretion at "spamming" (basically) everyone and thus took appropriate action by letting you know you made a mistake so that you won't do it again in the future. No serious harm though. For future information, generally for these types of things, if there is going to be carpools arranged, there will be official information about that sent by one of the organizers -- maybe they will set up a mailing list, or designate a contact person to arrange all carpools. If there isn't one, then you could ask the conference contact person to see if one will be assigned. And just to restate it, asking unknown people for favours imposes yourself on others and is impolite. You should only ever use a reply-all when everyone on the list really needs to see your reply -- most of the time a reply to the original sender is sufficient.

I think if you want to know how good a prof is for teaching classes, a good way to find out is to ask the current grad students in the program! I don't think RMP measures other things like research supervision etc.

The way you worded the description ("MSc" and "province") makes me think you are talking about Canadian graduate programs. So I want to point out one very very important difference in Canadian grad school system vs. the US and why some of the advice (and indeed my own other posts on similar topics) on these forums may not fully apply! The difference is that in Canada, your supervisor has almost all of the power to decide whether or not to accept you as a student (as long as you meet school and departmental requirements). They generally fund you from the very start and they have already put aside a chunk of money for you. In the US, usually your first year is funded by the school or department, and you are not usually assigned (and paid by) a supervisor right away. So, if you back out of a US grad school now, it's not as much of an impact on any individual prof than if you back out of a Canadian grad school. When I was finishing my undergrad, my supervisor also asked me the same question (although they did not give a specific deadline, it was implied I should decide ASAP back in March as well). He told me that he would take me as a student if I wanted to stay, but if not, he needs to make a decision on a few other applicants who have applied to him. If something similar is happening in your case, this means that not only you would have screwed someone out of a position, but also your supervisor might not end up with any students at all for the next year, which will affect their research work, grant proposals, etc. I think backing out of a Canadian grad program at this stage results in much more collateral damage than a US program. It might still be worth it for you to do so, but just keep that in mind. But have you considered doing your MSc at your current school and then do a PhD elsewhere? You say it's beneficial for you to go somewhere else for grad school -- as long as your PhD and BSc aren't in the same place, it's a good thing. In addition, given the smaller size of Canada, many students end up staying at one place anyways, so it's not as much of a "stigma" to stay in one place.

I think it would be a good question to ask to the programs at both schools as well. I'm assuming you have already checked to make sure both programs are okay with you being enrolled in more than one program at once -- I know that some full-time graduate programs, and almost all undergraduate program come with the restriction that you are not enrolled in any other school. Outside of whether or not you can handle the courseload, I think you should talk to the programs because there could be other scheduling conflicts that are not always immediately evident. What if you have exam scheduling conflicts? Each program probably assumes its students are only attending their program, and things would be scheduled without consideration of the other school (e.g. extra review sessions, office hours, whatever other activities your programs may require). So, you would need to have full support of both programs so that they would make allowances for you to reschedule exams or whatever in cases of conflict. And, outside of the minimum academic requirements, there may be extra optional activities (special seminars, events etc.) that could enrich your experience and help you get work later on that you might have to miss out on because of the other program. One of the advantages of attending a "good" school is access to these kind of activities, so by doing 2 degrees at once, you might compromise more than just your grades.

The prof might also actually include other useful information about the course not evident in the transcript, such as "Student X scored a B in my class and ranked 5th out of 30 in this year's class, but he/she would be in the top 10th percentile of all my students I ever taught in this class" (just an example). So, a letter would be able to explain a harsh curve or other abnormalities. Definitely ask the prof's opinion on using him/her as a reference (i.e. whether they would be able to write a strong LOR). However, that said, the main issue that admissions committees might flag is that you have a LOR from a prof who you took just one (so it seems) course with. Usually, you want your LORs to come from research supervisors, but many students have trouble finding 3 supervisors, so it is probably okay to have a 3rd LOR be from a course. In my opinion, the best LORs from a course have some or all of these qualities: - the prof has taught many students - the prof has taught you over several courses - the prof teaches core course(s) for your program / program you are applying to - the prof can make a strong statement about your performance, aptitude and work ethic compared to your peers I don't know your situation, so I can't say whether this prof will be your best choice or not! But hopefully what I said will help you decide that for yourself (or decide that I'm full of it and ignore this )

I've asked the same prof to write me letters for undergraduate research fellowships, MSc applications, MSc fellowships, PhD applications, and PhD scholarships/fellowships. I haven't actually worked with him since 2008, I haven't been in the same city as him since 2010, and my last request to him was early this year. I was worried about the same thing but he assures me that it's part of his job and he is happy to help. It's not THAT much of a burden to them if you do what SeriousSillyPutty said -- basically, just don't rush them (OMG I need a letter TOMORROW!!!1!!!) and show that you appreciate their time. I usually like to give them a heads up 2-4 weeks in advance, especially if you know you will be asking them for several letters and then send the actual request/reminder about 2 weeks before. In my "heads up" email, I usually ask if they need me to do anything to help them -- for example if they are going to be away soon and would prefer the request sent a month in advance. I also ALWAYS attach an updated CV and if possible, the contents of my actual application (since they always ask for that). I also make sure to clearly provide any information about me that they will need to fill out on the form (even if it's obvious stuff that they might have on file, like my full name, student number, program I am in / applying to etc.) If it's an electronic reference, it should be super simple -- they would likely have an old letter for me on file and just copy/paste, do a few edits, and submit. If they have to snail mail it in, I also try to send them a pre-addressed, stamped envelope along with the forms they need to fill out so they can just complete the form, put in envelope and send it away. Finally, if you are applying to grad schools and will need like 5+ letters from the same people, I made a one-page summary sheet with pertinent info about me at the top (GPA, GRE scores, research interests summarized in a few sentences) and then a list of schools/programs I'm applying to, deadlines, faculty at the school I'm interested in, and anything special about the application (snail mail required? letterhead? etc.)

There are other types of ergonomic chairs that aren't as expensive but definitely not as fancy (i.e. "floating" feeling). In all the schools I've worked at, it has been the department's responsibility to provide its students with decent work chairs. By "decent", I mean the ability to adjust height and tilt to put the screen at a comfortable viewing angle and keyboard and mouse placed at a comfortable height. These chairs are definitely not as fancy -- probably cost about $100 or so each at an office supply store. I don't know if you can ever convince your department to buy everyone those fancy chairs (unless you mean getting one yourself for working at home). If I really needed it, I might consider getting such a chair for myself if I was mostly working from home, but I wouldn't leave almost $1000 of my personal things at school! Some students I know have also been trying out a "standing desk", where they sit for ~4 hours and then work from a standing position for ~4 hours. I don't know what your injury is, so I don't know if this is even viable for you, but just adding to the ergonomic discussion! Basically, what I'm saying is that your workplace should have decent ergonomic measures and if they don't, the students should petition the department for change!

In addition to the above, another piece of advice I got from my mentors on choosing a PhD advisor (and thus thesis topic) is to pick a topic that will be interesting to people who are going to hire you when you graduate. When applying to a job or post-doc, your PhD dissertation is going to be your "calling card". In your last year of school, you will probably be presenting this topic at conferences, and people are going to associate this topic with your name. So the advice I got was to make sure this topic is interesting to people! I would also agree with the above people that said you should find a topic that you "don't hate", but it doesn't have to be your number one passion. From talking to others, I find that few people actually work on the exact same topic since finishing their PhD. So I think as long as I am in a field that you are passionate about, and I have a topic that I don't hate, then I would be happy! I don't expect to get to 100% choose my research topics until I secure my own grants, and even then, you have to satisfy the grant committees! I am reminded of a certain PhD Comic (http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1436)

You still have a lot of time to decide, even though it might not feel like it. If mathematicsgre.com is anything like physicsgre.com (and I think it is!), then the people who post their profiles there are NOT a fair sample of graduate school applicants. It's mostly the high ranking students that know about and choose to post -- some people are intimidated by the scary profiles and choose to only read the threads and not post. If I had thought everyone who posted on physicsgre.com was a representative sample of applicants, I'd never apply anywhere! Secondly, I'm not sure how your med school works, but usually you can get into med school with any undergraduate degree, as long as you take some list of pre-requisites. At my undergrad, this list was not so extensive that you could not pursue your own major as well -- you would just have to use most (if not all) of your electives on med school related courses. Plenty of my friends finished their BSc in Physics and then applied to medical school. It might be a bit more work but you can probably still apply to BOTH MDs and PhDs programs in your 4th year if you still haven't decided yet. But basically, I'm saying that you keep pursuing both paths for now and see how you feel in a couple of years. I know that I didn't really realise that I wanted to do grad schol until my 3rd year -- at this point, I had to take a couple of extra courses to catch up to the "grad school track" but if I didn't keep my options open in earlier years, it could have meant a lot of extra work. Finally, I really really want to say, don't give in to family pressures when pursuing your education!! I had felt some pressure from my own parents (they didn't understand why I would want to do a PhD, and especially not in astronomy, where there is no real job market other than academia -- they were really pushing me towards medical physics for awhile) but by the time I actually graduated, they were very understanding and I'm grateful for that. So, keeping both PhD and med school options open might give your parents some time to realise that you are your own person with your own interests and they might back off on the med school pressure. I don't think there is any way for you to immediately know what your PhD interests, if any, would be, and you have many more years of college to go through. I think keeping as many options open as possible will give you more choices down the road. But it's also not like you have to decide your future forever either -- even if you change your mind later, you might still be able to switch paths (it might cost you a year of coursework, but it could be worth it when you finally know what your passion is).

http://whatshouldwecallgradschool.tumblr.com/ No further explanation necessary!