TakeruK

I agree with @Eigen. Especially at top schools, there are huge variations in the background of students. Some people have years of experience and some people have none. Some people have top GRE scores and others have 50th percentile. In my field, I do think GPA is an actual factor at the top schools though, since physics/astro/planetary is a field where you really do need a strong undergrad foundation. So I think most students at the school I went to had at least 3.5 GPA. This doesn't mean that there aren't people with lower GPAs that still get in because of other merits though. Also, at least at the program I was at, I get the sense that top tier schools actually are more willing and more able to take more "risks" in accepting students. I got the sense that my program accepted students based on potential more than standard achievement metrics such as GPA, GRE, amount of experience etc. Every prof there had plenty of funding for students, it's not like they can only take one every few years and therefore have to be very selective to ensure they get a return on investment. So, my advice for top schools is to figure out what they want and show them you've got it. Showing a great fit into their research program is very very important.

Too late is when it arrives too late to be considered. So 3 days is probably fine. Many committees will not meet until January so you might have lots of time still. If a school has a ton of applications, they might do some work in December to collate/sort the files and prepare packages for the committee to review first. If a school doesn't then all materials might go directly to the committee. As long as your materials get to the profs before they start making decisions, it will be fine. Some schools may throw out incomplete applications, but I don't think many schools will reject an applicant for an incomplete item out of their control (i.e. if it's missing a SOP then that might be rejected but not if it's missing a LOR). That said, what you should do now is to contact the schools waiting for this letter and let them know that your prof has told you he will be a little bit late in submitting the letter. Make sure you contact both the graduate school / university-level people as well as the specific department you are applying to. Don't make excuses for your prof or complain about it or anything. Just state what has happened so that they know to expect the letter a little late.

Sometimes schools require recommenders to use their work email address and reject gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc. email addresses. Maybe that is the problem?

Oh also sometimes when special action has to be taken to match up documents, the online system doesn't get updated. This happened to me when my transcript at one school where my middle name (two words but one name) confused the system. A human had to manually assign my submitted transcript to my application. It didn't update on the online thing and when I emailed them they said they have my transcript and that the online system won't ever update if it's a manual intervention like that. You should definitely stick with your plan to follow up but just sharing another experience that might be related.

Are you allowed to compete as many times as you want? The previous universities I was at limited it to one competition per degree only so most people waited until they were done or almost done. Although my PhD school had really strict rules to enter (for dumb reasons) and it led to only 3 students entering so they had to cancel it! If you can compete every year, then why not? It's good practice even if you don't feel 100% ready. The main cost is whether you can spare the time to practice and do it. The ones I've seen usually include their results and findings too and I found that these presentations are always way more engaging and better than the presentations that just say what they are going to do instead of what they achieved. At the places I've been to, the judging is on both the presentation clarity/style and also the research.

I don't think you need to be worried but it would be a good idea to keep on top of this migration. First, have you talked to the UW Dept of Biology admissions people or the general University admissions people? If you have not yet contacted the Dept specifically about this topic, you should do so now and let them know what you said here. That way, they will know to expect this. If they already know then maybe wait until the end of this week before reaching out again? I don't know when your dept will start looking at applications. You can check TheGradCafe's Results search to see when interviews/decisions start coming out. If they don't come out until the new year, it's probably not as urgent but if you notice that interviews begin in mid-December, then maybe follow up by Wednesday or something, just in case.

It is too bad that your advisor will only write letters for PhD programs, but maybe they are right that applying for another Masters is not a good idea. Still, it sucks that they are not letting you make your own decision. For places where you are interested in both PhD and Masters degrees, you should apply to the PhD program (i.e. the "option 2"). Sometimes when you apply to a PhD program, they ask if you are also interested in a Masters program. Check that box if they ask. If they do not, maybe you can ask the department if there is a way for you to indicate on your application that you are interested in both PhD and Masters programs. Maybe they will suggest you add a note to the application. I don't think you should apply to both Masters and PhD programs at the same school because usually they don't even let you submit 2 applications to the same department. Usually the PhD program will offer Masters admission to their wait-listed candidates or if you contact them, they might tell you how to also indicate interest to Masters. This method also has the advantage of allowing you to use your advisor's letter because you are still applying to a PhD program. If you only get admission to Masters, then you can at least say that you tried but you would like to take their Masters offer. Then, if there are any other schools where you only want to apply to their Masters program, you can do option 1 and not use your advisor's letter. It might decrease your chance of admission though, because you are already a Masters student and not having your current advisor's letter is not good.

You're worry too much. Fix it for future applications but don't worry about it for the ones already sent.

It depends a lot on the field and the department. Usually schools do not want applicants to upload the letter on behalf of the letter writer since schools don't expect students to have access to their letters. In my field, the best thing to do is for the letter writer to just change the date on the letter (if there was one) and re-upload it again like last year. Then it won't raise any questions about whether the letter is compromised by the fact that you've seen it. Strangely, even though the culture of letters in my field is that they must always be positive, there is still weird expectations of secrecy that doesn't really serve a purpose.

Glad to have been helpful Good luck!

It means the number of semesters to complete the course. Sometimes in the USA and Canada, a single course/class spans multiple semesters. When computing GPA, the school will often weigh a 2-semester class twice as much as a single semester class. Note: For extra confusion, a series of courses is NOT the same as a multi-semester single course. In the USA and Canada, usually if the course number is different, then it's a different course despite whether or not the material is the same. For example.... If you took PHIL 120: Introduction to Philosophy from September to April, spanning two semesters and got one single grade only at the end of April then this is a "two semester" class. You might get an interim grade in December to see how you're doing but ultimately your transcript only shows one course number and one grade for the entire year. However, if you took PHIL 120a from September to December then PHIL 120b from January to April, covering the exact same material but divided into two courses back-to-back with two separate entries on your transcript, then these are two "one-semester" classes. Sometimes the same school will offer the same course material in two styles! Finally, maybe it was just an example but you said you took Introduction to Philosophy in your 3rd semester. In USA schools, the 3rd semester is the summer semester, where you don't normally take classes (but sometimes there are summer courses). I know your non-American school may be different. But here's a rule of thumb to decide whether you should use the term "semester" or "quarter" (as per the instructions): - US schools on the semester system usually have 3 semesters per year: two of which are for courses and one longer semester for the summer. Semesters in US schools are about 14-16 weeks long (In Canada, it's 12-13 weeks), plus some time for exams. - US schools on the quarter system usually have 4 quarters per year: three of which are for courses and one longer quarter for the summer. Quarters in US schools are about 10 weeks long, plus some time for exams.

Whenever people ask me about their profile in astro/physics/planetary, my criteria is always whether or not it's worth submitting an application, not whether or not you have a good chance of getting in. This is because for the most competitive program, it's almost impossible to determine what is a "good chance" of getting in as there is a lot of unknown and random factors. In the USA, there are about 300 new astronomy grad students every year. I think only the top 1% or so will have profiles so strong that they are pretty much guaranteed to get in anywhere. The rest of us will have strong profiles that make it worth applying to the top schools, but admission is never guaranteed. Although a very strong student that applies to 8+ schools is likely to get in somewhere, hopefully! So, in your case, based on this information you've provided, it seems like your profile is strong enough that it's worth applying to any school where you find a good research fit and you're interested in attending. Whether or not I can suggest other programs really really depends on your research interests. I would say that on your current list, there are only 2 public schools, which is a good thing as international student spots at public schools are pretty hard to get. If you don't want to discuss your research interests here (understandable, as it will make your post less anonymous but also more helpful), take a look at these other schools if you haven't already. In my opinion, they have strong astrophysics programs, although in many cases they are specifically strong for certain areas which may not be your interest: U. Washington, Cornell, Yale, University of Pennsylvania, Penn State University, U. Arizona (for Planetary Science), UT Austin, Ohio State, UCLA

Sorry, I don't understand what you are asking. You say you don't want to finish your masters in your current school, which is fine. But what do you want to do next? Do you want to apply to PhD programs (which is good, then you can use the LOR) or not (which doesn't really matter since you might not even need this LOR?)

My understanding of the issue is not just that the task is "distasteful" but that the student is trolling the TA / the class. It's one thing for a student to be writing an argument you may disagree with but is doing so in good faith but another thing to deal with problematic and vitriolic papers. If the TA does not feel comfortable approaching the student alone about their paper, it is perfectly within their rights and the correct thing to do to call for support. Ultimately, a grad student has very little leverage over an undergrad student and it's not fair for a student to have to deal with a "troll" just to earn their tuition waiver/stipend. Just like any worker has the right to refuse unsafe work and to be in a workplace free of harassment, going to the instructor is the right first step if the TA feels an encounter with the student could go badly. Note that the original advice was not just to "hand off" the task. Instead, it was to go to the instructor and let them deal with it as they see fit. This may include them saying "yeah, I'll take it from here" or it might include them working with you to figure out the best solution. Going to the instructor for help is not a sign of weakness or shirking your TA duties. Instead, it's exactly what a TA should do if they encounter a problem they don't know how to deal with: talk to your superior.

I originally clicked on this thread thinking the OP would be asking others to justify the use of MS Word!

Is there any useful information on the second page? If not, then sure you can do that, and tell the school why you are doing that. Or, one thing I did when I had to send the unofficial score report was to censor all personal information not relevant to the application, including scores I didn't want to send and score recipients. I made it very clear (big box with text on the PDF) and explained it to them when I emailed the PDF to them so there's no suspicion of me trying to alter the PDF. I just said what I did and that if they did not find it acceptable, please let me know. Everything was fine, and I was admitted. That said, in your case, since it's the same university, I think the school might know anyways. It depends on how your particular university handles the score reports.

In your case, because the system did accept and process it, I don't think there is anything you can do at this point. If the system refused to let you submit after the deadline and you had a compelling reason to be a little late, emailing them would help you get an extension perhaps. But since the system did process it, the school will receive it. I think what they decide to do with it is beyond your control now and so there's nothing you can do. My guess is that this won't matter at all. Maybe Monday is the earliest they will start processing applications for the departments to evaluate. Might even be later though. Hopefully you will be fine!

Agree with fuzzy: If you are in town and want to meet with a faculty member as a prospective student, send them a message asking to meet with them, during regular work hours, asking exactly that. It's not favoritism or unethical (in terms of admissions ethics) unless the professor makes it so or if it happens to violate some internal rule that the department has about contact with prospective students. In either case, it's not your problem---it's the professor's responsibility to act ethically. If they choose to favour you because they met you in person (while they did not meet other candidates in person) then that's their bad, not yours. I don't see how it could cause conflict between you and other members of the department. At least in my field, the meetings you propose are very normal. In terms of trying to avoid it becoming a date (or being seen as a date): if you treat it like a research meeting then it's a research meeting. Like fuzzy said, meeting at their office, grabbing coffee and returning to campus afterwards (chatting along the way) is not at all romantic. Keep the discussion away from romance and it won't be romantic. (Clarification: not intending to imply that it's on you (or any one person) to keep the conversation away from romance, but I mean it as advice to two professionals who want to have a one-on-one meeting and neither want it to be construed as a "date"). You say that you are not one of those people that 100% separates social and work. That's okay, I don't think anyone can separate it 100% either. But I am not sure what you mean by raising this concern? It's definitely okay to discuss non-work/social topics (as long as they are appropriate for a professional meeting) in these meetings. Small talk about hobbies or whatever is probably fine. But since this is your first meeting with them, it's not like you are going to be socializing like they are your best friend anyways. Finally, are you specifically worried about the scenario where you are friendly to a professor and they think you have romantic interests in them? I am not sure if that is what you meant in your final sentence, sorry if I misunderstood. If you are only worried about how it looks then I would say that it's not your "problem" because it is not your fault if some sketchy prof interprets your friendly actions as romantic interest! But you might also understandably be worried about your own safety and/or professional consequences if the sketchy prof takes it out on you when they find out they were wrong about their assumptions of your intentions. Unfortunately in this second case, I don't have any experience or expertise, I just know that sometimes my colleagues are worried about this too. Hope you can get good advice from someone else with actual experience on this.

In my field, the advice would be to put the end date as the expected date of the completion of all degree requirements. Typically, this means the date of the final deposit of your Masters thesis. It is rare for the school to want the degree conferral date, but I guess it's possible. At the schools I've been to in the past, once you have finished your degree requirements, you get (or can request) a letter from your school stating that Student XYZ completed all degree requirements on date ABC. Usually this comes with a notation on your transcript too (as well as degree conferral). So I wouldn't worry about the transcript not "matching" because when the profs check your transcript, they will see that you have not yet have a "degree requirements completed" notation. They know that grad students often complete courses before the rest of the degree requirements, so it's not weird at all if there are no courses in 2017 listed.

My old PhD school basically told its students that it will try to take this approach. Knowing how they work, I think it would be possible. Although I am "safe" from these changes (it doesn't look like either bill will have the taxes retroactive to Jan 1 2017 ), I do hope my old school is right. That said, no one should count on any sort of arrangements protecting them until they see it in writing!

I certainly agree with you there. A student requesting a LOR should never find ways to circumvent the inherent mutual trust, whether it's through FERPA or not. I just mean that if the letter writer is willing to share the contents of the letter with the student, the evaluation/admissions committee need not to know (and should not know) since it's a matter between the student and their letter writer. I'm just saying that your earlier post made it sound like you cannot waive the right if you also ask the letter writer about your letter. In a vacuum, or if we were able to start the system all over again and get everyone to agree on the same rules, then I completely agree with you. However, although I am often guilty of it myself, as advice-givers, we need to be responsible enough to distinguish between what the ideal world should be and what is reality (I hope to at least always provide a more practical viewpoint when presenting an idealistic one). At least in my field (and evidently, many others as this comes up in many web searches), there is "letter inflation" or whatever you want to call it. Everyone knows that the 100% positive letters aren't telling the whole story. But if you write a less than 100% positive letter for your student, you're basically dooming them. In a "letter economy" where 100% positive is the norm (and people expect hidden negatives) what would a letter that dares to say something negative mean? If everyone expects letters to not mention bad things, then how bad is it that the letter actually brings it up? And what other negatives are not being said? So, I think it's all good in theory to want to bring more meaning back into the letters. But I think professors do a huge disservice to their students if they don't fall in line with the field norms. You have responsibility to your students as well as your field. It's not right to risk your students' career in an attempt to "right" the profession. And similarly for those of us who aren't professors or letter writers, I think we should be careful about the advice we give. I do have other ideas on how I think the letter business should be corrected but this is not really the best place for that!

Second this.

Although I am sure you know what is actually asked of applicants when they "waive their rights", I think it's important to be clear here for other readers. The majority of application forms asks the applicant to waive the right granted by FERPA to inspect the letter because it goes into your student record and FERPA grants you the right to view your student record. Therefore when one waives this right, one is only waiving the right to use FERPA in the manner above. This does not mean you are not allowed to simply ask the letter writer to show you their letter (or access the letter via any other means). There may be other applications out there that have more general waivers, so be careful, but know that the general FERPA waiver does not preclude you from accessing your letters via any other means. Not that I'm recommending people do this (I actually don't think this is a good idea) but just saying this since if you did see the letter in some other way, there is no need to worry, you can still honestly and ethically tick off the FERPA waiver box. Maybe we're just talking about semantics here, but I would advocate that students do not want honest letters if being honest means a discussion of their strengths and weaknesses. In the ideal world, I would love to have the LOR treated as an unbiased and fair evaluation. But in reality, the LOR must be 100% positive, at least in North American schools. Now of course, you still want honest letters, because you don't want someone to lie for you, so I agree with you when it comes to "honest" letters in the sense of "truthful" letters. However, I don't think it is good advice for students to seek "honest" letters in the sense of "candid" or the description I quoted from @Sigaba here. These letters are letters of "recommendation". They are supposed to be from people who want you to get this position and will write you a supportive, positive letter. They are not "reviews" of your work. For more, see: https://theprofessorisin.com/2016/09/07/how-to-write-a-recommendation-letter/

I don't think it's a good idea to use Facebook or other social media for work/official correspondence because I wouldn't want messages to go the other way either (i.e. it feels like too much mixing of my personal and professional spaces). I have many advisors, committee members and collaborators on my friends list but all my contact with them on social media has been, well, social! The one exception is the Facebook Groups for professional interactions (in my field, there are many). There, I have plenty of science discussions when I can contribute. I do think sometimes it's funny when I send a FB contact an email and am waiting for a response but then see them active elsewhere on FB. But I purposefully try very hard to not notice it because I wouldn't want them to track my work hours by watching my facebook activity! Sometimes the timing is just so coincidental that it sticks out though. However, the above is just my opinion/approach to separating work and personal life. More general practical advice: I would not use Facebook Messenger or other social media for official correspondence unless the professor / more senior person initiates it (but if I was the more senior person, I wouldn't initiate it for the reasons above).

Yes, you should be a little more specific. Follow the instructions from the funding agency. If no further instructions are provided, then I would suggest: 1. Describe all existing avenues of funding available to you and explain why you still need to apply to this funding source. Starting small and moving outwards, these funding avenues may be: your advisor, your department, your grad student organization, your university, and any other national sources (e.g. your profession's society). For these things, you should say whether or not the funding source exists and how much money (if any) have been committed from that source for this trip. If you will not be able to attend solely due to funding if you are not successful with these travel grants, then mention that. If this trip is exceptional in expense compared to what funding you can typically get, then mention it too. I think I remember you saying you were going to a conference in Europe. That's generally much more expensive and it's reasonable to request extra funds to help cover the extra costs. 2. Describe how attending this conference will have an important impact for your professional and career development. Be clear in how important this conference is! Make sure you emphasize that you are presenting at the conference. If you have an invited presentation and not just a "contributed" presentation, then say that too (but know that you won't need to be invited in order to get funding!) [if this hasn't already been asked elsewhere] 3. It would be a good idea to do a brief itemization of all expected expenses and sources of funding, to show the deficit or "need". In general, these funding agencies want to know that they are providing money to someone that is 1) in need of it and 2) can make a big difference in their careers. Each agency may have different goals, but the general gist is that people donated money (or the agency has secured money) in order to support early career people who would make a good contribution but otherwise cannot attend. Having the above information helps them determine how to best spend their money to support all the applicants. Depending on the organization and their resources, it might mean that they would prefer to support someone with absolutely no means to attend at all vs. someone who has already secured 80% of the funding. Sometimes the process is based on merit, especially if the funding source is the conference itself! But often the travel grant organizations are funding a wide range of things and they don't have the expertise to judge merit across disciplines, so it could be more need-based than anything else.