Jump to content

TheFez

Members
  • Posts

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TheFez

  1. Terese, I am not sure I agree with your premise. Your SOP isn't merely a reference to your academic achievements (your resume and transcripts do this) and goals. Your SOP should tell an Ad Com why you chose their program to apply to - who you might like to work for, and how your research interests line up with the schools. It's completely appropriate to make a brief and compelling case for how your academic background relates to applying for a PhD in psych. In your case it might be a mistake to avoid it. Read some good SOPs and adopt the habits - tuned to your own story: 1. Keep it engaging and to the point 2. Avoid hyperbole and flowery language - use facts and direct statements 3. Balance the paper with specific examples for each school by referring to their program, POIs, and a little bit about how their research interests you (caution here not to over-reach and get causght with bad facts, etc.) I am not a psych person - but I thought I saw that Psych is one area where it's common for PhD programs to ask for the GRE subject exam in psych. True? Are you planning to do that? Even for schools that don't require it, a high score on this test might help your case. Strong LORs that address your abilities to do graduate work and conduct research would help bolster your case. Spend time getting strong LORs.
  2. I put together a literature review article in economics last year. The survey included reading about 60 (empirical) papers of which about 40 were included. I had little help real help/direction on how to do this from mentors - so I developed a system of my own and a few tips: 1. I developed a standard review form I would fill out for each article. It contained brief citation information, as well as sections on the estimation method (OLS, FE, RE, Dynamic Programming, Nested Logit, etc.) specification (vars, controls) used, key variables, controls, data set size (N=) and origin (public, private). And a general comments section for interesting observations. I had a section for main findings, key assumptions, and then a section for observed problems with the paper (e.g. poor specification, endogeneity, reverse causality, data problems, etc.) I got this to a single page format with protected cells and "fill in the blanks". This was very helpful later on when I forgot many of the details. I numbered each paper and put this number on the form to make easy reference. [i also read about 20 theoretical papers and used these to to help "round out" the discussion since the theoretical developments were often tied to theoretical progress.] 2. I was told when reviewing papers to read the abstract, introduction and conclusion first. (Actually some professors said they thought this was sufficient - I read every page of every paper - a very time consuming task - but immensely rewarding. [i actually found a mathematical error in one paper that effected a key finding of the paper. I wrote to the author (now at MIT) and he confirmed my calculation and said he would "look into what went wrong during publication" - that was rewarding.] 3. Read a couple of really good survey articles as models for your own. There is even a journal of economic surveys to help this. 4. Use a good citation manager (I now use Zotero, at the time I just used the citation manager in Word - there's tons of options). Make lots of (hard copy and electronic) folders and name the papers with file names in a way you can tell a lot about the paper. I used the main authors name, a description of the good being observed (in my case) and used a grading system A,B,C,D,F at the end of the file name to help rank importance. Don't be afraid to be creative with file names to make recalling them easy. 5. The best way to find good papers is by starting with a good paper and reading it's main citations. This stuff forms a giant tree to climb around in - so try to find one of the most recent articles in the field and work backwards in time. The tough part of course is how to organize the paper, select important papers rather than including everything, highlight the most relevant aspects of the literature and show connections, and finally to "synthesize" the literature into some original thoughts of your own (e.g. what interesting questions remain unsettled, where is there current debate, what would help move the field forward, etc.) Hope something here might be helpful.
  3. What the heck is Capacity Development?
  4. You saw The Big Bang Theory where Sheldon had to overcome his fear of speaking? --- Drink heavily (but try not to take off your pants).
  5. I am "regularizing" with a Red Bull and Monster Drink regimen to compensate for my general lack of sleep. This along with pencil pushing, mental gymnastics, math exercises and occasional recreational sex.
  6. Ah, Miranda, you see that The scale clearly shows the Fez (and his inner circle) count 110% !
  7. Well, and as an actual PhD candidate it seems like your opinion actually counts Dal ! Reflecting on Sigaba's point about who's opinion should matter most, perhaps some sort of weighting scale like the one below would help: The Fez and Members of The Fez Friends Inner Circle ................................... 110% PhD Candidates in hard stuff like Math, Econ and Physics............................... 100% PhD Candidates in fuzzy stuff ........................................................................... 95% History ABDs ..................................................................................................... 90% PhD Candidates with over 750 posts................................................................. 89% Masters Candidates (except Math, Econ, etc.) ................................................. 80% Phoenix Students ............................................................................................. 50% Practicing Attorneys Specializing in Contracts, etc............................................ 30% People with Good Intentions Only ..................................................................... 0%
  8. Hi All, I am looking for an online file storage service that basically functions simply as a "disk drive in the cloud" that I can access from any machine. I am less concerned with features like automated backup, collaboration, syncing and other stuff. I want to be able to save documents from a number of computers [nominally my own desktops (2) and laptop (1) but conceivably from any machine I might be working on]. My option is to lug around an external drive. I am guessing I need a lot of storage (100GB+) ... so something with low costs for high capacity. I see plenty of services like DropBox, Carbonite, Mozy, JustCloud, etc. etc. but I am looking for something simple and they sound too feature rich. I worry that programs running in the background just slow my machine down and I don't want to b e required to save cloud files locally. Has anybody try ZipCloud or something like that for example? Thanks for any suggestions.
  9. Hi Sigaba, I think we were offering advise because we were asked for it. If Bones, who claims to be an attorney, wanted expert legal advise they should hire a lawyer, or call Judge Judy, and not bother with us yahoos on TGC. For my part, I was not so much offering advise, as asking questions. Like you, I can't form even an uneducated (lay) opinion without knowing the details. For instance, I find the "ca. 50%" language particularly nagging. Though I am (fortunately) not a lawyer, doesn't a good contract usually specify things like the (exact) split of ownership, mechanisms for making decisions, and resolving disputes between the parties? I did learn that owning 51% can be much different from having "about 50%" in terms of who can "legally" do what. I also was surprised 1/2 way into the discussion when it was revealed that the adviser had an explicit conversation during which they said they didn't want to co-author the article and offered "lame" excuses. Until then, I had formed an impression that the adviser acted surreptitiously. Is it possible the adviser had some arguably legitimate reason? I admit to being drawn to this post by it's cloak-and-dagger drama and intrigue, and also because it seemed to be a cautionary tale. Along the lines of what you history folks remind us "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". For me, a lot of questions remain unanswered and now, sadly, Bones has decided to bail; leaving us hanging. I hope it all works out okay.
  10. Bones, It took some time to give us the fact that he informed you months ahead of time that he intended to publish this without you. Without a record of his (absurd) reasons, he may offer some other (plausible) reason for this action by claiming you did not comply with your agreement. You did not reply to my question about what you meant by "ca 50%" ownership. Contracts are usually very specific about whether it's 49%, 50% or 51% for example. And each of these changes the nature of your relationship markedly. If he has a controlling interest (> 50%)... maybe he has the right to do what he did. So what is the exact "split"? What does the contract say your obligations are? What does it say about resolving a disagreement between you two? I am not suggesting you are wrong, or haven't been wronged. But a possible spin on this is: 1. He had a contract with you where he was the controlling partner 2. (He claims) you did not comply 3. He exercises his right to go it alone and cut you out 4. He informed you of this decision art the time Is the professor one who is well regarded and has a good reputation otherwise? How is your rapport with others int he dept.; e.g. the department head, dean, etc.? Have other students had problems with this professor misappropriating Intellectual property? I would not "roll over" if you are 100% certain you are in the right - but I would tread cautiously when accusing a faculty member of ethics violation. The best route to me is to get a new adviser.
  11. You will undoubtedly have to submit GRE when applying. How bad were your previous scores?
  12. This is the common experience. Sounds silly but if you are easily distracted by these kinds of things you should visit the test center long before your test and observe what goes on so you are better prepared for test day.
  13. I think the point of the question is "move on - how?". It's still an incredible story and begs for some kind of rational explanation for the adviser's behavior if the facts are accurate. I agree you should meet with the department chairperson since you are currently in a no-win situation. Transferring programs will likely be viewed negatively and is costly to you in any number of ways. Remaining with the same adviser seems untenable. I am not sure taking this as a lesson is helpful - kind of like saying getting robbed in broad daylight is a lesson to be learned. I did find your explanation a bit puzzling however when you write that your ownership is "ca. 50%". Contracts are usually not "ca." kinds of documents and perhaps there is a big difference in what the contract says if the adviser owns 51%. That's my lesson from watching Shark Tank too much.
  14. Sounds like a tempest in a teapot to me. Seems like what you did was well intentioned and harmless. I am not even really sure what you are apologizing for... but at most apologize to the Professor who chastised you and let it drop.
  15. I hate to be doom and gloom - but not having LORs from academics is not good. Of course if you can't do anything about it - you have to do the best you can and hope your over application is strong enough. Weak letters from academics can do more harm than good. Its not a matter of just getting a letter that says "I had this guy in class and he got an A".. The process is designed to identify students who have not done real academic research before applying from those who have since the LOR is not about the students grades which are apparent from the transcript, but their work as a researcher, preparedness (and commitment) to do academic research, etc. The sad reality is that few "real jobs" provide that kind of preparation, so the comments by "bosses" and "coworkers" are not very relevant. Some returning students (myself included) take a semester or two to just do independent research with a professor to build that part of their CV.
  16. Here's a way to check.... most programs list their current grad students and their emails. Send a couple of notes to current students and ask them. You might get a couple of data points. (You can always tell the theorists from the experimentalists).
  17. I agree with the above and had the same experience... a low ranked state University and was admitted to all PhDs I applied to. I agree with Hillary however - do good on your GREs. But your LORs, prior research and SOP can easily tip the balance for you. Of course programs are competitive - so if your doppleganger has the same credentials and went to Princeton - you lose. But chances are good you will make the cut - get an interview and have a chance to shine.
  18. I agree with all that TakeruK posted - very good. I would add that an LOR from a professor who really knows you well as a person - as well as a student shines through in letters. Think of how you would be affected by reading a letter - you can tell a genuine recommendation from a fro forma response. They want a letter that is written about YOU and also relates your ability to do original work, at their school. Too few students IMO really try to establish a rapport with professors until it's too late - then we see posts on Grad Cafe that say "Help - I need LORs and none of my professors know me"... Personally, I think the "well known" professor LOR think is over-rated. I had really strong recommendations and (as I have been told) partly because their letters were in-depth, heart-felt and personal as well as an assessment of my ability to succeed in the program.
  19. I am guessing you already know the answer... Yes. 151Q is about 56% percentile, which at a competitive school, in a highly quantitative field, is not very good. Besides, you must have plenty of time to retake - so other than the test fee - is there a downside? Do you feel the score is an accurate reflection of your ability?
  20. I don't think the PhD programs care about BU's admissions policy or the thesis... 1. You will have to take the GRE - and so you are right, that's a non-issue. You will need a good score. 2. As part of the complete application evaluation they will try to see how prepared you are to do research. If you have no previous evidence of original work then you won't score many points with the Ad Comm. Most PhD program decisions work sorta like this... 1. Does the candidate meet some minimum level of academic achievement? Based on GRE scores, GPA, etc. 2. If so - then they look at the whole package - research, recommendations, GRE scores, quality of UG/Masters program, etc. It is rare, but even failing #1 - a candidate with exceptional work can be admitted. By way of comparison, my school did not have a thesis requirement either (in an econ masters) but I did some independent research, wrote a paper an presented at a conference. I am sure this was a plus. You may want to check into whether the schools you are applying to have a "writing sample" as part of their application process. If they do (at many this is optional) - then start strategizing.
  21. I found (and I ended up with a 164V for reference - good or bad)... 1. There are NO good audio lists. Perhaps you could make one using a good list. But the one's I tried- were awful. 2. I like the Vocab in a Box cards from either Kaplan, or Barrons. They are both good lists - although not extremely tough. The index card format is a nice way to study IMO. 3. The hardest list I found that was challenging was an iPad APP called GRE Vocab Genius. It costs $4.99 but I thought was much much better than any "free" app. It has some very tough words, keeps track of your progress, has an algorithm for mixing it up til you master words, etc. I found a lot of the online lists were too easy, the boxed sets medium, and the Genius app was a tough set.
  22. I found the index cards were a great way to go. Both Barrons and Kaplan have nice sets you can buy on Amazon - even used and cheaply. They are fun to practice with and you seperate out the words you a 100% confident with from those you miss, until you master them. I also had an APP on my iPhone that was great - GRE Vocab Genius that was excellent because it has a huge bank of words, and some really tough ones as well as Latin roots. It's $4.99, but I htought much better than the free one's that were not much more than the typical lists. Good luck.
  23. GRE Scores are important - no matter how much people here complain about them or bash the test. I hear from members of an Ad Com that the value of the test is not only in allowing them some sort of justifiable benchmark for evaluating applications, but that GRE performance is well correlated to success in programs - and that the if nothing else - the GRE measures your ability to study for a do well on the GRE which is a signal to them. When you get to PhD programs from competitive schools, lots of people are smart and did cool stuff before they go there. So it all counts... GPA, GRE, LORs, SOP, etc etc. If I had a 1000 GRE score combined there is no question I would retake the test.
  24. I think RMP attracts two kinds of students: those who love a professor, and those who hate them. I do however think that many posts are specific enough in their praise/criticism to be useful. If there is a high number of ratings (>12 or so) I think the validity goes up pretty well.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use