TakeruK

I think just saying that you appreciate them at your next regular meeting could be a good way to let them know. It might be easier to do this when there's something you recently achieve instead of just saying it generally. For example, after finishing the final version of a paper that was sent to coauthors, I let my advisor how much I appreciated their time in helping me make the paper the best that it can be, and that I felt really happy with the paper. Or, after one of these good discussion sessions, you can send them a message later to say how helpful you found that discussion. (Or mention this the next time you see them). Even without a "milestone", I think just letting your advisor know that you find their mentoring helpful after your next meeting could be a good idea too. It's just that having a specific event to refer to could make it easier to bring up In addition to this, you can also nominate them for mentoring awards on your campus, if your school has these. My school's grad student council recognizes faculty members as good mentors based on nominations from students each year. (If you want to do something in this vein).

You will see many people with external funding at top ranked universities---in my program, it's something like 1 out of 3 students will hold some sort of external award at some point in their grad career, and maybe around 20% enter with such an award. However, I think it would be naive to say that the awards made a big difference in their admission. The reason, I think, is that winning a significant external award usually means you are already going to be a very desirable candidate for graduate programs. So I wouldn't say that winning these awards helped those candidates get into top programs, but rather, it's not a coincidence that someone who wins an external award would also be selected for graduate programs! In addition, while saving the school a ton of money would be nice, at top programs, money is not the only limiting resource. My school is trying to fundraise a ton of money so that every single graduate student will be on an (internal) fellowship and will be "free" to each department. But this doesn't mean we are going to double our graduate student population. This is because the other limiting resource is time/energy of the faculty to supervise and train the graduate student. I don't know what the norm is in your field. But I think 20-30 schools is way too many to apply to (unless you are trying to do something like get into the same school with a partner or limiting yourself to certain areas only etc.).

I have had friends leave PhD programs because of similar reasons, or because they are unhappy with the department culture, or because their advisors didn't want them to continue etc. But I'm not 100% sure what you are asking. First, I want to say that it's completely possible that, through no fault of her own, that your friend's experience with your program is completely different than your own. But I think you know this. I'm just confused because it sounds a little bit like you think your friend shouldn't act this way and that they should have tried harder to stay/fit in. When you say it like "how to maintain a relationship until they leave", it sounds as if you do not want to maintain your friendship with this person after they leave. I mean, it's your choice on who you choose as friends, but I don't think you need to feel that you are in between your friend and your department. You don't have to feel like you need to defend the department to your friend and your friend doesn't need to feel like she has to defend her decision to you. Yes, it turns out you were one of three people she could talk to in the department, but it's not your fault that your friend chose to leave. It's also not your job to convince her to stay or to worry about what could have gone differently. I understand that you feel uncomfortable that someone close to you feels anger/hatred towards a program (which I think you really like?) but this might be a time where you see it from your friend's perspective. I think it's probably harder for someone to choose to leave a program, even if they were unhappy there, than it is for someone to have their friend leave the program. So, maybe your friend really just needs you to be their friend right now. Sorry if that was a little too preachy. In my similar situation, my friend was actually my friend before they went to my program (they were a few years behind me in undergrad). It was a little easier because there wasn't much hatred/anger towards the program---instead, it was when my friend realised that their goals and priorities aren't well aligned with the program's so they left. Finally, I think if the main source of the discomfort is the fact that your friend brings up a lot of negativity about a program that you really like, then I think that is something that can be addressed. Sometimes you do need to let your friend rant a bit, but it's also not fair for you to be your friend's only source to vent about their frustrations with the program! Maybe if you are no longer comfortable with the quantity or quality of your friend's ranting, you can talk to her about it. She is your friend and hopefully she will realise that you are happy in the program and that it's possible for you to be on her side but also be happy with the department because you two are different people with different experiences.

I use Mendeley and like Zotero, I can put tags (or "folders") to categorize the papers in my digital library. Mendeley also takes care of the physical files themselves though. I currently have it set to something like a folder for each author, a folder for year, and then a file containing the title of the paper. However, this is automatically done by Mendeley and if I wanted it to go Year/Author/Title.pdf or Journal/Year/Author/title.pdf etc I just have to change my preferences and it's all automatically redone. In reality, I never actually try to navigate through the folders where the real PDFs live because I view everything thru Mendeley. If I needed the actual PDF (to send to a friend, for example), I can tell Mendeley to navigate to the folder that contains the paper and I get to the PDF right away, without having to remember how my PDF system works.

Quick question: I had thought that for reservists, deployment is only on a voluntary basis unless a national emergency happens? (I know this is true in the Canadian armed forces, but I am not as familiar with US military). So, while you are a student, could you choose to not volunteer for deployment? If you do go on military leave for several semesters, the school is required to grant this leave and restore you to full student status when you return, but depending on each school's policy, your advsior/supervisor doesn't have to put their whole project on hold for an entire year. When you return, you may have to switch to a different project if your advisor/supervisor wants someone else to make progress on that work. So, depending on when you take the deployment leave, it could seriously disrupt your thesis project and reduce your ability to get the most out of your PhD time and your research (i.e. publishing papers etc.). However, depending on what your goals are post-PhD and what you value in your life, this could be a good trade for you. i.e. the short answer is that it is likely possible to take a year off but in reality, this has the potential of affecting your chances in academia post-PhD.

The number of problem sets can vary in grad classes, that's normal. 45 is a lot of sets!!! But that means each individual set doesn't really matter. Even if it drops to 40 sets, worth a total of 40%, then each set is only worth 1%. Losing 25% on this first one (and maybe the second one) means you lose 0.5% of your total grade. Not a big deal. It sounds like you and your classmates are losing points for similar reasons to why students in my class lose points---not knowing when and where to develop your analysis further. This is a skill that comes with practice. I still suggest you come to your professor in office hours soon, now that you have the problem set graded and ask for specific examples of one or two cases where you could have developed your ideas further. Then, try again next time. See if you still lose points. Repeat until you learn the right way of doing it. It also sounds like to me that you are more used to a different style of teaching and this class follows a different pedagogical style. You may not believe it, but withholding points is an effective and valid method of motivating students to learn more. It's okay for a professor to design a problem set where people aren't going to get 100% so that the lost points become guidance on where to improve for next time. When I grade problem sets, I set the standard for 100% to be pretty high. I give out my "rubric" (which is a list of expectations) in the first week and make it clear that I am expecting deep and through analysis, but that the questions themselves won't tell you exactly when to do this. It's up to the student to determine which parts require deeper analysis than others. So, typically, very few students get 100% in the first few problem sets. The average score is around 70% to 80%. Eventually, as students learn from where they lose points, they develop better ability to discern whether an observation is trivial or worth expanding upon. People start scoring higher. Average grades rise to around 85% to 90% and a few people even get 100%. It's really hard to get 100% and honestly, it probably takes a student an extra 3 hours (problem sets should be finished in about 6 hours) to go from 90% to 100% and I don't really expect students to get 100% unless they are personally motivated to learn that material. If this style of teaching and learning is different from what you have been used to then it could be a shock. I know that some people are used to classes where the criteria is set and if you meet it, then you should score 100%. That is, anything less than 100% means you are deficient in some way. However, in many grad classes, the goal score is probably more like 80% to 90% because there are other priorities and you can't just get 100% in everything. This is because there are at least two types of grading: one that is meant for a "final" evaluation of skills and one that is meant for "feedback". To me, it sounds like you are treating your homework grade as an evaluation/test of your skills. However, I feel that your professor is using your homework grades as feedback and it's meant for you to identify places for improvement and work on them. (**I'm not saying the professor is blame-free, generally it is a good idea for an instructor to be clear and transparent in what they are doing, but oh well). Finally, I do recommend that you take your professor's word that your grades won't matter. I don't know what your professor has in mind for sure, but one reason the syllabus doesn't list the ranges for A, B, C etc. is because they might arise naturally out of the distribution. For example, if the majority of students score between 80% and 90% then that might be the range for A. In addition, the general advice i get in my grad programs is that you want to aim for a B+/A- grade average (maybe more like A-). I also think you should take the professor's advice and instead of worrying about whether you were wronged in the grading scheme (again, does it really matter since it's less than 1% difference) and instead focus on learning and using the feedback to identify what you need to improve.

I kind of went off on a tangent in my last post, I realise now. My main point is that now, in your MA program and especially in your PhD program and in other situations both academic and otherwise, the best response to a potential problem isn't always to "report to authorities". It's generally best to first talk to the person and clarify intentions and give it some time for you and the other person to resolve. There are some exceptions, e.g. someone is unlawfully harassing you. Also, to clarify the rubrics thing---it doesn't have to be an actual rubric. For courses I TA, I provide a one page sheet that lists expectations for problem sets (it's tough to write rubrics for problem sets since each problem is different). I sometimes also write a mock question and a mock student response, and then I "grade" my response so that expectations are clear.

I agree with the others. I am a huge proponent of fair and transparent grading schemes. Last year, I taught the grading session to new TAs at my school and I tried my best to emphasize the importance of a transparent grading scheme. Our school's teaching center instructs our faculty to do the same. So, in my opinion, good instructors should do the same. For an upper level class or a grad class though, rubrics shouldn't spell out exactly everything you must do in order to get a grade because grad students are expected to know it. For my grad class, my rubric for full marks would say something like "Reflect critically on the answers you find" and I mean that when you calculate X = 5 or whatever, I expect a note discussing why X=5 is a significant result, even though the problem set itself only says "Solve for X." instead of "Solve for X and tell me why it's important." because then I have to add that extra phrase to every single question, plus, it's not always an important result---it's up to the student to reflect on the answer and decide whether it's worth writing more about, not up to the instructor to spoon-feed all these questions. However, this doesn't mean that every instructor you get in school (grad school or otherwise) will be a "good" instructor in this sense. Sometimes you will get instructors with terrible lecturing skills. They might write illegibly on the board, provide homework sets late, don't grade things on time, make last minute changes to problem sets etc. You'll meet a huge range of instructors ranging from absolutely terrible to average to mostly good with a few faults to perfect. You're not going to do yourself or anyone else any favours if you file complaints for every instructor that isn't perfect. The complaint system is likely meant for really bad cases where some kind of high level intervention is necessary. This is not one of those cases. I don't know the full story but not providing clear rubrics is hardly a major "infraction". Instead, my advice is to meet with the professor and find out how to not lose points in the future. I hope you wrote your email from 2 days ago in a nice tone that won't damage relationships! You should approach this as a learning opportunity for you. Do not come to the meeting with the mindset of regaining these points or with the intention of having the professor justify their actions. Come to the meeting with the perspective of something like "I see that I lost points for X, Y, Z here, and I would like to improve this in future problem sets. Do you have any suggestions or ways for me to improve?". If you wrote your email from 2 days ago in a different tone, I suggest that you follow up with something more like the above paragraph and ask for a meeting. Or come during the next office hours. By the way, 2 days ago is....Wednesday? I wouldn't think that not getting a response for 2 days means they won't respond to you. It's also the long weekend now, so don't expect a response until later next week.

I am not in your field, but I can give some thoughts on the logistics side of things. 1. Are you able to apply to PhD programs to start in Fall 2017, and then choose to begin the 37 week cyber program with the National Guard only if you do not get into PhD programs (you'd find out about PhD programs between Feb and May 2017). That is, if you don't get into a PhD program this year, maybe do your military program in the 2017-2018 academic year (not sure if when you say it's one academic year long that you were referring to only the length or also the time). 2. I don't know whether the specific experience of the military program provide useful skills to a research PhD program (not in your field) but do you have any other research experience in CS thus far? If not, then maybe even something like this can give you a unique skillset! But if you already have done other work, it might not add very much. Hopefully someone in your field will see this and answer! 3. Your military commitments should not affect your admission. I don't think you even need to disclose that? But I think all schools are required to provide leave for military training and deployments and they shouldn't discriminate against you for it. Realistically, even if you are able to get all the leave approved, depending on the length of time you need for military leave, it could affect your academic/research development. I know a lot of grad students who are in the reserves and have military commitments about one night per week, a weekend per month and then the occasional multi-week thing usually in the summer. This is usually very manageable for a grad student. But if you need to leave for a whole semester, that could impact classes (many classes only offered once every 2 years at some places), and make you miss things like important conferences. And of course, taking a semester off from your research will slow your progress a lot. Just some thoughts!

It depends on the scholarship. In Canada and the US, there are often many scholarships at the school-level (i.e. it's given out by the school for programs at that school only). Usually, you tick a box during the application stage and you will be considered for many of these scholarships automatically, but sometimes you have to apply separately. Note that for many of these school specific scholarships, they are often funded by a donor that gave money for a specific cause. For example, there may be a scholarship for students who are part of military families. Or for residents of a certain area etc. After the eligibility requirements are met, the most common method of deciding is by GPA and GRE test scores. Sometimes, there is an evaluation based on an essay but since this is more work, the donors don't usually specify this requirement. Other times, the "need" of the student is considered, and usually this is evaluated by filling out a FAFSA form (i.e. a thing that adds up all of your costs and your income & savings and calculates how much you need the money). However, for almost all of these scholarships, there is only a small number that is open to international students (if that's what you are). Finally, I just want to say that the above answer is only for things we normally call "scholarships" in science & engineering fields in North America. Usually scholarships like I describe above are awarded for programs that don't normally fund their students (like Masters programs in the US). But, when you apply for grad schools, you may also get funding from the department through things like TAships, fellowships or other scholarships that are really just coming from a pot of money somewhere and the admissions committee decides how to allocate it (i.e. no extra application needed and the criteria for deciding is the same as the criteria for being admitted basically). For Masters programs, funding is limited but it's always worth a try.

Some schools open applications as early as July, while others wait until September or October. The deadlines are usually December. Some things to keep in mind: - It doesn't matter when you submit your application, as long as it's before the deadline, unless the school's website says otherwise (e.g. rolling admissions) - Remember to give your letter writers a few weeks notice so that they can complete the letter prior to the deadline. - Some schools have an earlier deadline than usual for international students due to the extra processing. - Some schools have separate deadlines for the materials you are responsible for (e.g. essays etc.) and materials from others (transcripts, letters) - Account for time for you to get official transcripts and test scores, if necessary!

I think it depends a lot on how the department in question does admissions and whether the prof completely peaces out for the sabbatical or whether they still stick around for things that affect them beyond their sabbatical year. For example, in the departments I've been in, some profs on sabbatical will come back for the admissions committee meetings and for new student Open House days so that when they return in 2017, they can resume research with new students right away. Other profs prefer to take the time completely off and they don't worry about not having any students when they return in 2017 because they can wait until 2018. So I think the best advice is what @menge said---contact them and ask if they will be interested in taking students for a Fall 2017 start.

My usual advice is to treat fall applications as a class on its own and budget time for it accordingly. This doesn't work as well for you, since you are currently a graduate student, but sometimes I suggest taking one fewer class in the fall semester so that you can spend the 8-10 hours you normally spend on that class towards your applications. Or, if they must take the full load, I would suggest stealing 1-2 hours from time budgeted for each course for applications. In the long run, the applications could be more important than getting an A- instead of a B+ in some course. You're not an undergrad but maybe the "spirit" of the advice is the same---when you have limited resources and need to use more of it, you have to make cutbacks on other parts of your life. From your description, it sounds like the graduate classes are the least structured work times and could potentially eat up more time than expected. So I'd figure out how many actual working hours you can manage per week (50? 60?), subtract out the 20 hours for your assistantships, and set a time limit on how much effort you are going to put into your lectureship and grad classes.

Oh, yeah, being in a different building increases the barriers! Also, arriving at a different time. Sometimes, in my program, there are two batches of arrivals (in June/July and in Sept) and the two batches generally form their own social groups at first, but once everyone works together for classes, people merge better. If you'd like, you can consider asking for a desk with everyone else. Being in the same open space office would make a big difference in integrating. However, there are certainly advantages to your current setup too so it's a choice!

I second AP's suggestions. If more interaction with your cohort is what you want, then I'd take the initiative now and take the lead. Academics are super awkward and when it's the first few weeks**, people sometimes just make friends with the first person they meet and then stick to them all the times so that they know someone! This might discourage them from taking risks to make new friends (e.g. you). So, you need to be the driving force! **Your first few weeks may seem very long but over the 5+ years of your degree, it will be a short time! Here are some things that I do when I start a new program to make friends (and what I do now to keep building these relationships): 1. We all have offices along a hallway, typically. In the morning, I visit my colleagues in their offices. Just to chat and say hi. Maybe share something exciting that happened. Ask about their weekend plans. Ask how their weekend went etc. 2. When going to class, I actually go a bit earlier, so that whomever I sit next to at the beginning, we have a few minutes before class begins to chat. 3. I do homework in groups. In my field/programs, it's highly recommended to work in groups because it takes way too long to do it all yourself. Also, the homework are designed so that you learn while discussing them with your classmates. If you're nervous about approaching others to hang out for a social thing, consider asking them if they would want to work on homework X together at a specified time. 4. At lunch time, people generally go along the hallways and ask who else is interested. In my programs, typically there will be a lunch group every day (not the same people each day since we have other plans too but there's always at least 5 or 6 people in the program together) If this doesn't already happen, you can start it! Alternatively, if lunch is too big of a commitment, consider coming around at 10am or 2pm and see if anyone wants coffee (or tea). 5. Make effort to interact with people when you are outside of your office. e.g. if you're in the kitchen and someone else is there, stop and say hi. Ask them how their day is going (ask it in a way that invites actual dialogue instead of just "fine, and yours?" 6. Once you have some of the above things going, incorporate visits to colleagues as part of your work culture. I think I am in each of the other 4 grad student offices at least 2 or 3 times per week. For many of us, the main advantage/reason of going into the office to work (instead of just reading at home or in the library) is interactions with our colleagues. When I'm stuck on something, I go to a friend. When I want to celebrate my code working, I visit a friend and share the good news. It's reciprocated too---people come to me for advice on things I'm supposed to be good at! This collegial and collaborative environment is what makes academia awesome, so I'd work to foster it. 7. Say yes. Especially in the beginning, say "yes" to more social events than you might normally say yes to. If someone invites you to X, for the first semester, I'd say go to it. You have so many people to meet and even if you're a more introverted person, consider it an investment in your future. After you say yes to a bunch of events and attend, you'll continue to get more invitations and after a semester or so, being more selective on what you have energy to attend is okay. However, if it turns out that you decline the first 2 or 3 invites, people may just stop inviting you to things. Finally, I also want to second what fuzzy said---you don't have to feel obligated to fit in and make friends with your cohort. If you truly don't like them or if you don't want to do these things, then don't! There are many other great people in other departments (e.g. meeting via university clubs) or in the town/city you live in (e.g. look for groups for young professionals in your city or some other club/hobby/sports team).

It's not a big deal for an undergrad to not have published any papers even if they have had a couple of years of lab experience. Sometimes labwork takes more than a couple of years to reach publishable results.

If you have good reason to believe that your work would not be happy with you applying for grad programs, my recommendation is to make sure they don't find out about your application until you have an acceptance. So, I would not ask anyone at your work for a letter of reference. Instead, you will have to write about your position in your statement of purpose and in your CV. Does your research assistant position allow you to publish or present your work in any way (conferences etc.)? These things on your CV can demonstrate that you are doing good research work. But, I know that many companies will not allow their employees to publish research.

I remember that when I lived in Canada (fewer testing centers), you had to book your General GRE test months in advance if you are taking it during the busy season (Fall) and if you have specific requirements on when you could take the test (e.g. weekends only). I also had to travel to a different city via a 3-4 hour bus ride to take the test! I would be surprised to find out that you, living in a place like SF, would have to travel far, but it might be not that strange that all the weekends for the busiest months are booked up by now! However, given that there are reported issues, I'd second the recommendation of calling ETS now and seeing if you can book a test over the phone for SF first and if not, then maybe book the Sacramento location now before it fills up too. I think you can cancel for a $50 fee if a SF location opens up later (might be worth it if that is how much it would cost for you to get to Sacramento!)

I can help answer some of these questions. But remember that some of it will really depend on each person. 1. How much to study? I studied for about 2 hours per day, 3-4 days per week for 2 months leading up to the General GRE, I think. About 35 hours was spent on the GRE Verbal because that was my weakest point. I just tried to memorize as many words as I could and then tried to answer sample GRE questions using the same words I just tried to memorize. This helps prepare both the vocab and the type of question. I probably spent a total of 5 hours on the Quant section because I felt really comfortable with that. What I did was to take several practice GRE tests to make sure there weren't any surprises and reviewed all of the example question types. I only spent 2 hours on the essay part, which was, in hindsight, not the best idea. However, I don't think my AW score prevented me from getting into any school. Hard to know though. Finally, the remaining chunk of time (15 hours or so?) was spent getting familiar with the test. Use the software on the ETS website to simulate an exam environment. Get used to the buttons and how the menu works etc. Do some practice exams. Read over the ETS materials that describe the test and the correct answers. I find it really helps to get "in the head of the test creator" because it helps me understand what they are looking for. Training for the test helps a lot more than simply studying! 2. Was it hard? I found it difficult enough that even though I feel confident in the abilities that the GRE tests, I felt that extra studying was necessary. That is, I didn't think it was a test that you just took when you felt like it. However, best possible performance on the test isn't the goal---for me, I just needed to score high enough that I didn't think my test scores would hinder my applications. Tough to say how "hard" it was and that's subjective anyways. 3. How early did you take it before applications? I submitted most of my applications in December 2011 and I took my test in June 2011. I did this so that I could use the summer to study for the Physics Subject GRE. I was in a MSc Physics program at the time and that summer was also a quiet time in my program (In May 2011, my building went under construction so I lost access to my office for a month, so it was a good study month). Also, the GRE was undergoing a change to the Revised GRE in August 2011 so I wanted to take the test prior to the change (since all study materials I had access to were from the old format). If it were not for these factors, I might have waited until August to take the test. 4. How many times did you take it? Just once. I planned to just apply with whatever scores I had. I didn't have time or money to take it multiple times and also like I said, it doesn't matter as much for my field. Oh, this was also before ScoreSelect so if I took it twice, they would have seen both scores. 5. Online or on paper? The General GRE is administered as a computer test unless there are very special circumstances that require you to take a paper test. For me, I actually had to take my test in Toronto (where your "location" says you are) at a test center downtown (they do computer tests for all sorts of exams). This meant I had to pay for travel to Toronto and spend a night in Toronto prior to the exam, making my costs go up even more! If this is your last year of your Bachelor's degree, then you will want to be applying this winter for grad schools! Reserve about 15 business days for your General GRE scores to be available to the schools you are applying to. Also, do you need to take the Psychology GRE Subject test as well? I remember when I was taking my Physics GRE subject test, there were a ton of Psychology test takers in the room as well! All of the subject tests happen in the same room at the same time. The Subject tests only happens at 3 specific times per year, in 2016, it's a single Saturday each in April, September and October. April has already passed and it might be the case that the September test date is full. If you require the subject test, I highly recommend signing up for it on the ETS website right now! In my experience, standby testing for Subject tests are pretty reliable. You just have to show up on the test date with the fee + $25 and if there is room (usually yes, but you won't know for sure until the day of). So if you need to do the subject test, I'd sign up for the October date and if you want a chance to do it twice, do standby in September as well. Good luck!

Hello! I think you are heading in the right direction and I agree with your dad---take it one step at a time. To address some of your concerns: You are not so old that you would be negatively affected in your grad school applications. If you are going to turn 25 soon and you're going to transfer to UCSB (2 more years? 3 years?) So you will still be well under 30 by the time you start a grad program. Don't worry about your age. In the same vein, being older will actually help your grades. People grow and change over time and admissions committees will know this. This will mean that your later grades (in the past year, plus whatever you will earn at UCSB) will matter a lot more than what you have completed so far. I wouldn't worry about your current GPA either. With hard work at UCSB, you can attain a very competitive profile for grad schools. Finally, my advice would be to re-iterate that you should take it one step at a time. It's great that you have goals for graduate school and indeed, your plan outlined here is a great one and I think it will put you on track to achieve these goals. But the first step is transferring to UCSB and doing really well in those classes there. Once you get there and start focus on becoming the best student you can be, it would be a good idea to start looking into research opportunities and other things that will help you get into grad school. Then, after you get to try some research and get a sense of what kind of careers a PhD can lead to (through talking with professors, grad students, other undergrads, going to career fairs type things etc.) then you can decide if graduate school is the right path for you.

In addition, this could vary based on what you want your students to spend their time doing and accomplishing. For example, in my field, we sometimes have classes where the at-home work is almost entirely reading so the reading load is much heavier in those classes. In other classes that I've taken and TA'ed for, reading is more of a supplemental activity so there may only be a tiny bit of assigned reading (and more optional reading) because the at-home work is assigned as problem sets, lab work, etc. Since it sounds like you are a grad student preparing this class, I think fuzzy's and rising_star's advice are more practical since you probably have less leeway to "rock the boat" in how this class is taught than if you were a professor. But this is another useful factor to keep in mind for the future perhaps.

Yes, it is possible and there are possible negative ramifications but the details depend on each case and whether the damage is worth it depends on each case as well! However, it sounds like you are worrying about a hypothetical, so maybe this answer will be most helpful to you: - If you are applying to funded US programs that are part of the Council of Graduate Schools Resolution then, your offer will be valid until April 15, 2017. All schools part of this resolution will all set a deadline of April 15, no matter when they respond with an offer, so that you have an equal chance to consider every offer. This is a simplification but the basic gist is that for offers of funded PhD programs, you have until April 15. - For schools not part of this convention or outside of the US, then you may have to do things like ask for additional time to decide etc. Many major Canadian schools will follow the April 15 convention though since there's lots of parallels Canadian and US schools. Others will generally give you about 4 weeks but will also generally be okay with a few weeks of extension if required. Anyways, I think this is a problem to not worry about until you get to it Then you can search for specific situation (or post about your specific case) here and people can be more helpful with things that can work for you.

I think the opinions and arguments presented here are all very good. I just want to say that although I don't agree with many of them, that doesn't mean I'm not listening and rethinking. Here are some additional thoughts based on what's presented: 1. The University should be, first and foremost, a place for its students. I think discussions of difficult/unpopular/potentially terrible ideas should be allowed on campus if there are groups of students that want this to happen (even if there are groups that don't want it to happen). In my view of what a "safe space" is, these events can happen without either group feeling that they are oppressed or not listened to. 2. I think, based on our own experiences with extreme opinions on both sides, that we have different perspectives on what free speech / safe space is? For example, most of my debates and interactions with people that are against safe spaces on my campus (undergrads mostly) seem to revolve around the fact that safe spaces prevent free speech and therefore they can say/do whatever they want on campus. One person literally told me that they felt that our school's policies infringes against free speech because they would not be allowed to spray paint a swastika on a tree on campus or wear a shirt that says something to the similar effect. 3. In my discussions regarding safe spaces, the interracial marriage example is often used to argue for the point that what's offensive today isn't necessarily what is "wrong". I think this is true and it's a very good example. It's something I don't have a direct answer to and I think when we argue about what is "right" or "wrong", we have to keep this in mind. However, I think it is not a logical leap to go from this idea to "every idea should be discussed all the time, in all places". --- Therefore, when I argue that safe spaces and triggering warnings are good and the University should put the needs of their students at the forefront, what I'm really arguing for is this: The University is a place for exchange of intellectual ideas and learning. But it is also a place where students, especially young people, are developing their own identities. College can be a tough time for a lot of developing young people, and some people have had experiences that were very hard and these experiences could impact their ability to learn. It is not realistic (nor correct, according to education research, as far as I've learned) to expect students to magically and completely separate their identity from the work they are learning and doing. Therefore, I do think some content in University materials should come with trigger warnings. And where possible, faculty should adjust their course material based on their students experiences*. In addition, safe spaces allow students to engage with these ideas in a manner they are comfortable with** and this enhances their ability to learn because they spend mental energy on the topic, instead of having to worry when the next terrible/triggering thing will pop up, or whether all of the content in their coursework means that the school is a bad environment for them, or just that the school/instructor doesn't know any better. My main problem with people who are against safe spaces is that these people often feel that because the University is supposed an intellectual place, they should be able to engage me in any topic of discussion, no matter if I'm comfortable with it. And I don't think that's correct. But the other extreme (where nothing is ever discussed) isn't good either. In my ideal university, all ideas can be discussed in the appropriate time and place. * Note 1: I know that in some fields this can be a lot more difficult than in others. However, I think that before anyone argues that "this is a classic work and part of the canon so we can't modify it!", I think it's worth reflecting on why it's part of the canon of your field (and who made it that way??) and whether or not we should necessarily keep it just because it was how we learned it. For an example from my field, last year, one of the first discoverers of exoplanets, Geoff Marcy, was found responsible for sexual misconduct throughout his decades-long career. He is now "retired" from the University and no longer working in the field. In classes, when discussing the first discoveries (mid 1990s), Marcy was often discussed as a great genius and wonderful person (even though he's not even the first discoverer, just the first American one). Now, when I teach the history, I still mention his name where appropriate, but I think it's reasonable for our field to stop giving Marcy such a revered status. I emphasize the work of other brilliant scientists instead. ** Note 2: This might mean that some students might choose to never engage in certain ideas. But we also have students that choose to never do homework, or read assignments, or basically just do the bare minimum to pass. And who knows, for some people, maybe they are better off as a person if they don't have to relive traumatic events, even if they don't learn one important aspect of the field. Knowledge isn't always the most important thing, even at a University. We should let the students make the choice for themselves on triggering content.

I do think we are basically feeling the same way. My main reason for advocating more "active" protesting is because I am seeing a trend in academia that I do not support and the University of Chicago's letter appears to support. And, the trend seems to be that although people say that they are open to discourse and express sentiments like what UofC wrote, what they are really saying is: We want to have academic discourse on our campus, but discourse has to occur only in the ways we specify. And the ways they specify (e.g. the example @DerPhilosoph gives of asking a devastating question) does a lot more to support the status quo than it actually does to allow true discussion. It assumes that any action that is outside of "civilized academic discourse" where we all write/speak politely to one another is actually not intellectual. But remember, these actions on these campuses involve academics! Academics (at all levels, undergrads, grads, postdocs, faculty) do also support these actions and take part in them. It is a little patronizing to categorize these actions as anti-intellectuals. Therefore, I encourage other academics to accept that there are ways to having discourse that is not what one might define as traditionally academic. Legal protests like the ones I describe above are a type of academic discussion and they should be considered as one. If we restrict discourse to only media that we approve of, we risk losing important points of view.

In my experience, this doesn't really work. Put yourself in the shoes of a person who objects to a speaker. It means you have to attend the entire event yourself, subjecting yourself to the objectionable material and then speak to the speaker, and supposedly the audience who is going to be generally supportive of the speaker. Remember that this is a speaker/event that you strongly object to---perhaps they are speaking about an issue you strongly care about. This means you have to put yourself through a lot of distress to make your point, while the other person has everything arranged for them by the university and their supporters. And, the whole thing is uneven---the other side gets to speak for about an hour, and the opposing side only gets a few minutes. And in addition, generally, the University can be more effective and more justified in preventing protestors from actually getting into the room where the lecture/event is being held. Sometimes the event is invite-only, so you can't go in to protest. Also, I am not 100% supportive of protests that actually go into the event and protest because if you, e.g. have a group of 20-30 students that disagree coming in with matching t-shirts, signs, etc. it will be even more distracting and disruptive than just protesting outside. I also think the students that protest the events aren't just protesting the speaker. They are also protesting the fact that the school is choosing to host the speaker. The message is not just "don't listen to this guy", it is also "hey University of X, we're a large group of students that don't like what you are doing". And, a responsible university would and should listen. I'm writing this from a perspective of my undergrad experience, where all the major universities are public and paid for by tax dollars and therefore they should be responsible to and report to the taxpayers (in an indirect sense). The private US schools are certainly very different from this. I agree with you there. I'm not a fan of the over the top gestures myself and when I work with other students on writing messages to our universities, I tend to steer projects that I lead / am involved in towards more "moderate" messages. However, I try not to judge other causes based on their moderate or not-moderate messages. It's their decision and right to voice their thoughts. In addition, I think, for causes that we do agree with (but do not agree with their over-the-top-ness), instead of judging their words as a mistake, we should be more empathetic and recognize that these messages are a product of their frustration and anger. This probably means it's a problem that affects them in a more profound way that it affects us, so we should pay attention to perspectives outside of our own. What seems "moderate" and "fair" to us may be unacceptable to someone who have had much worse experiences.