ridofme

Are you on an F1? I did some googling for you (which is generally better than soliciting legal advice from the Internet masses), and couldn't find info about working on-campus during the summer, so perhaps you can use the Immigration Customs and Enforcement contact info below. It appears that off-campus work is very restricted, however. USCIS http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=e34c83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e34c83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD ICE contact info: http://www.ice.gov/sevis/contact.htm DHS http://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/students/resources/working

I agree with deleting the entire first paragraph, along with the paragraph about music/blood donation (unless the prompt particularly asks about your interests outside the field). I also think it would benefit you to consider the upside-down triangle/inverted pyramid style of writing to reorganize this essay. You are moving chronologically through your resume, essentially, and so it takes a while to get to the point: why you want to apply for this program in the present. In the first paragraph, you need to introduce yourself and explain your reasoning for pursuing this degree, e.g. "I am applying for {DEGREE} because of a longstanding interest in {FIELD/RESEARCH QUESTION/WORK YOU DID, ETC.}..." You need to explain what you want to do with this MS (go on to a PhD) way earlier, instead of burying it in some middle paragraph. You can discuss your background after that. Finally, I would remove some of the highfalutin language - "latent predilection", "required impetus", "enthusiastic zeal", etc. These kinds of descriptions feel very forced if not used precisely. I'm not sure how much you're looking to cut, but I think you could cut out a lot of your descriptors in general - clean up the language a bit.

I think I read in the Graduate Essays book by Donald Asher that the balance of power between the graduate school and the department varies between institutions. Harvard was cited as having particularly strong individual departments. But in general I think the grad school serves an administrative role, as mentioned above. I read somewhere else (can't remember exactly) that the graduate school also is the one who makes decisions on whether or not to admit people with criminal records - i.e., they could theoretically put their foot down about not admitting a candidate with certain convictions.

I think the conent is great, I would just recommend tightening up some of the wording. The last paragraph is kind of boring and redundant. Here are my suggestions: In the future, I plan to obtain a PhD in psychology in order to pursue an academic career investigating time perception, working as either a professor or in a pure research setting. I hope to address what I consider to be several key questions, including such as: What is the relationship between phenomenological experience, attention, memory, and time perception? How can neurotransmitters, specifically serotonin and dopamine, affect the way in which we perceive time? Do factors that influence processes such as sensory perception or memory (e.g. the fight-or-flight response, psychotropic drugs, brain abnormalities, mental illness, etc.) also have an effect on time perception? How does the brain keep track of time in the absence of external sensory stimulation such as while we are sleeping? I consider these questions to be especially important because their answers Answering these crucial questions will help us determine the extent to which time perception is a distinct process, independent of other modes of cognition, giving us a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomena as it stands in and of itself as well as in relation to other systems. There are several reasons why I would like to attend Made-Up State University before moving on to pursue a doctorate. By now it may be obvious that a A major driving force behind my decision to apply to Made Up State is my desire to work with Dr. Pepper, whose research on time perception has had a significantly impacted on my thinking. Several of his publications, including "Really Important Paper" and "Groundbreaking Work", touch on some of the key questions I listed above. In fact, I first began considering MUSU as a prospect for my graduate studies after reading a paper Dr. Pepper co-authored outlining the striking similarities between timing and working memory systems in the brain. Furthermore, considering that I plan to integrate concepts from several different disciplines into my future research, I believe that both volunteering in your at MUSU's visual perception and cognitive neuroscience labs as well as while simultaenously enrolling in several specific courses you provide, such as like Perception and Psychopharmacology, will help me broaden my skillset and achieve a stronger, more specialized grasp of the fields I plan to incorporate several different disciplines I hope to integrate into my future research. Therefore, I believe MUSU will help me both deepen my understanding of various areas in psychology and gain experience in the specific field I plan to pursue in the future. At (my undergraduate university), I have had the opportunity to gain a great deal of research experience, which has firmly solidified my passion for psychological research. For six months, I worked under Dr. Strangelove assisting a PhD candidate with the literature review for her dissertation, which examined gene-environment interactions in the etiology of schizophrenia. This required an extensive amount of independent work., and In addition to familiarizing me with the literature, it also helped me learn to analyze and link large amounts of information from a wide variety of sources. Furthermore, since August of 2012 I have been working under Dr. Ya Who in the Visual Cognition Lab at MUU. This has been a fantastic learning experience for me as I have been able to get both a taste of what life in a lab would be like and also gain a significant amount of hands-on experience in a research setting. Most importantly, I have learned the value of utilizing creativity in order to develop and test theoretical concepts, and during my tenure in the lab, which I have been able use this in order to create and design an eye tracking experiment of my own, which This independent experiment relates to time perception and examines the way the brain extracts information from both time and space in order to optimize behavior. Dr. Who has been kind enough take me on as a volunteer research assistant while I carry out the study, and I hope to publish the findings soon. In conclusion, I believe that I would thrive at MUSU. I am extremely motivated and eager to get to work. I have already begun to develop a focused set of interests, and I believe that admittance to your program would help me tremendously in advancing them even further.

I don't know anything about engineering, but I'll make some general comments. I think it's a compelling, well-written essay overall, except for the intro. Unfortunately, a shaky start could cause the adcoms to dismiss an otherwise great essay, so I would try to rework it. I might cut the entire first paragraph, actually. It doesn't really add much, and you don't need to announce that you ...that's the whole point of the SOP. That said, if you want to keep the paragraph, I suggest rewriting with the opening phrase, which is quite awkward: While 'liking' can be used as a noun, it really doesn't work here (unless this sounds more natural in British English...I can't speak to that) I'm not sure about your use of the word 'instictive' either. I would also replace 'towards' with 'for'. My suggestion: "An innate interest in science and passion for technology..." While I agree with sugarmilk that early life experiences are not relevant to grad school applications, I don't think you dwell too much on the subject, so it's not particularly offensive to my sensibilities. But if you're struggling to make a word count, that's a place you could cut. From the third paragraph on, I think it's top-notch.

I second what dalu said. I will add that it really depends on your goals. I have a friend who is currently studying public administration at a secondary campus of our state's public university system - a decent, but not remotely prestigious school. The program is actually fully-funded for all students, as it's meant to funnel people into local government positions in the region. Last summer she interned for the government of a big suburb (100k+), and was offered a job there upon graduation. So she's going to graduate with minimal debt (just living expenses in a cheap town) with a job lined up, although I imagine that the salary will be low. However, this friend of mine would never be competitive for a job at a think-tank in D.C., and would likely lose out to someone from HKS or SIPA when applying for a job at a major non-profit. The network that this school provides her doesn't extend beyond our state borders, let alone to the upper echelons of power (whatever that means in the non-profit/government world). But if you want to be a Leslie Knope type, then the program she attends is perfect. I applied to schools all across the country, and with varying levels of 'prestige', and I really have no idea who (if anyone) will accept me. But if I am lucky enough to be able to make a choice, I am definitely going to look into the potential career paths that each school could provide me, beyond what they list on their websites. I think that this will mean talking to recent grads, looking into organizations where I'd love to work and looking at the career paths of the top dogs, etc. Geography here is another consideration. There's a lot of talk on these boards how Berkeley's program, while often cited as the #1 program in the country, generally leads to jobs in Sacramento or the Bay Area. That could be total BS, but it's something worth looking into before packing up your entire life and moving to California, especially if envision yourself settling somewhere else.

If you're serious about a PhD, you need to focus on getting research experience, from what I understand. If you have two years left in your bachelor's degree, try to see if there's a professor doing work that interests you in political science/public policy, and try to get a position as a research assistant or the like. This will also help you figure out if academe is right for you.

I would definitely go with the faculty advisor. The newly-minted PhD is a distant second choice, but still preferable to the restaurant manager. If your applications are due in December-ish of 2013, you should be able to build a stronger relationship with the faculty advisor by then, especially now that you have it in mind. I assume that he has a PhD in public health or a closely-related field? If so, his credentials are the best of your options, hands down, and I've heard referees' letters are given more weight when they are in supervisory roles.

My understanding was that they do see your essays, but now I can't find any official source either way.

Quitting. My. Job. Also, ideally, a new computer.

I don't think the time is an issue, but rather the total lack of relevance. What can a restaurant manager say about your potential as a PhD student? If you're just down one letter, I would make an extra effort to establish a relationship with a professor or a practitioner in your field sometime in the next 10 months (I assume you'll be applying in fall 2013). Can you look for a research assistantship at Columbia? What about a summer internship in the field? Maybe do some schmoozing at office hours?

Was Mike/Michael just a theoretical example, or is that actually your name? I would imagine you'll be fine if it is a common nickname like that, or like Matt/Matthew, Judith/Judy, Jennifer/Jen, etc. I would only be concerned if it's something more obscure (Elizabeth/Buffy) or potentially confusing (John/Jack). Maybe call the test center in advance?

I know little about MBA programs, but having looked into law school a bit, it's true that top programs have much higher average GPAs than top MPP/MPA/IR programs. But MPP/MPA/IR programs also require a lot of soft factors that law schools pay minimal attention to - language fluency, international experience, commitment to the public service, background in economics, etc. I also imagine that law schools (and probably business schools) get a lot more un- or under-qualified applicants, leading to lower acceptance rates, whereas MPP/MPA/IR programs tend to be more self-selective because these degrees are not seen as tickets to the gravy train. I'm not categorically denying that the 'caliber' of students differs between these degrees, but I think that some posters are defining the terms a bit too narrowly.

One thing to keep in mind: Princeton and Texas offer Master's of Public Affairs degrees, while schools like Syracuse offer Master's of Public Administration. From my understanding, the latter is the more professional, management-based curriculum to which you refer, while the former is simply a somewhat archaic way of referring to what we now call the MPP. That said, Princeton's MPP degree does seem to be equivalent to what many schools call a mid-career MPA. In the end, I imagine that all of these degrees look similar to employers, unless you are gunning for a very analytical "numbers man" position, in which case the more rigorous quantitative training in the MPP curriculum could be a boon.

Not a current student, but a 158Q is close to the averages at many of these schools, if not above in many cases. If you have solid quant coursework in addition, I wouldn't be concerned.

Yes, the eight or nine other schools I applied to all provided some kind of "send recommendation request" button that I could click before submitting my application. And I agree that it was nice to be able to give some feedback to Michigan!

Now that all my apps are in and I have nothing better to do, I've been browsing the gradcafe archives for more posts to obsess over. I came across these two gems... ...and thought it was high time for us to blow off a little steam and complain about the technical/logistical aspects of this year's applications, rather than agonize over that one C from freshman year, a minor typo in our SOPs, and the uncertainty of our own futures. I'll start: By far the most annoying application was UT-Austin. It all began with the Texas Common App. Every other school's application allowed me to send requests to my referees before the application was submitted, but with UT-Austin, I first had to submit the TCA, which required uploading my transcripts and paying the application fee. (SOP and CV could be uploaded later into the UT-Austin-specific app). Because I wanted to give my referees time to write the letters, this meant submitting the TCA a month before the actual UT-Austin app was due. After the TCA was in, I was not able to update any of the information I had initially submitted, even before the UT-Austin part was due, including uploading transcripts that included my fall grades. Also, once you uploaded something into the UT-Austin application, you COULD NOT DELETE IT. As in, if you uploaded your SOP, but noticed a typo before submission, you still could not delete and replace that SOP. Then, there was Michigan, where I could not skip between the sections of the application. I had to go through each page sequentially, clicking "next" or "previous". If some information was incomplete or in the wrong format on any page, the online application would not allow me to move to another page until I acknowledged that I would fix that information later. Next, the U. of Chicago, which asked me for salary information about all of my previous jobs, quantified in 'yearly base salary'. I understand that they are trying to differentiate between paid and unpaid work, but it seemed a little intrusive, and it's not like I applied for an MBA. Also, it would not allow me to enter hourly amounts, which, as a recent-ish graduate, is how many of my jobs have been compensated. A few general comments. The limitations of various drop-down menus were anxiety-producing. For example, in the education history sections, you almost always had to declare what kind of degree you had received or were expecting from each institution you attended. What about study abroad? Or schools you transferred from? Or courses you took as a non-degree student post-bachelor's degree? I would think that this issue would be common enough that schools could add a "no degree expected" option. Finally, most of the applications allowed me to download a PDF of my entire application to review before submission. This was much appreciated. I don't know why every school doesn't do this.

Re: cost, I would also add that you do not have to spend money on practice materials. I checked out a few books from my local library, and they were all editions for the new GRE.

I realize this might be too late for your deadlines, but all my applications that specifically asked for my econ background gave me the option to include courses not explicity titled "Intro to Microecon" or the like. You typically just had to provide a detailed explanation of the course content. If you've already submitted your applications, perhaps you can contact the schools about affixing an addendum with descriptions of these two classes you took.

I wonder where you are getting this information? I think the GRE is far from perfect, and I agree that it makes little sense to require the same test for aspiring English PhDs as for aspiring engineering master's students. Perhaps three different tests would make sense. But I do think the GRE's useful in helping schools compare candidates directly because GPAs can be more reflective of the grading policies and rigor of one's undergraduate institution than anything else. For example, a few of my friends who went to our state's flagship campus - considered a "public Ivy" - for the liberal arts all had ridiculously high GPAs: 3.96, 4.0, etc. They are all smart people, but nobody I knew in college got grades like that. I think the GRE can help adcomms better compare students who went to different undergrad institutions. I don't think a 2 or even 5-point difference in scores (on the new GRE) between two applicants necessarily means that there is a corresponding difference in intelligence between the two. But if someone really bombs the GRE, I do think that says something, either about the student's intellectual abilities, their unwillingness to prepare, or their ability to perform under pressure, all of which are relevant to admissions decisions.

Fair enough.

When do you think you'll hear back? Moving and getting a legit job makes no sense if you'll be quitting in 6 mos. time. I know it's hard to live at home after graduating - I did it briefly, and while looking back it was only a few months that I barely remember, at the time I felt like I had failed at life, despite the fact that I graduated into the peak of the recession and all of my friends were in the exact same situation! Anyhow, I know it sucks, but maybe try to find something super-temporary and non-committal (like the retail jobs you mentioned) to get some spending money, and then make your next move once you find out where the grad school chips fall, as it were.

I'm not sure what you're upset about - 20% is not that bad. As Lemeard notes, the acceptance rate of interviewed applicants is probably much higher. Keep prepping for the interview, and you'll be fine. That said, I have no idea why four people down-voted you. Geez, show a little compassion - we're all under stress here.

This is an interesting topic. I wonder if anyone has ideas about yield for professional programs, where cohorts are a lot larger (60-200 people for the various public policy programs to which I am applying). A lot of my target schools tout statistics like '1100 applicants for a class of 90', which makes it seem like an 8% acceptance rate. But when you think for an extra half second, you realize that one has no idea how many students they have to accept to get that incoming class of 90. I imagine that yield is lower in professional programs, as they tend to be unfunded, and a significant number of students might decide not to attend at all if they don't get those hard-to-come-by scholarships.

My mom has said the exact same thing - how proud she is of me for applying to such competitive schools. Similar to you, I've put a lot of work into this application cycle, so I think she's probably referring to that for the most part, but it's still frustrating! I suppose it's better to have overly supportive parents than disapproving ones, though.