Dal PhDer

Hi there!
 
I just wanted to start off by saying that you're probably not alone with those feelings. I think we've all felt intimidated at some point in grad school! But I wouldn't cut myself down, you're clearly skilled and experienced enough to have gotten this far! And you're motivated and eager to develop your critical and analytical skills- so that's great!
 
As far as changing the way you read/think about literature- it takes time and knowledge in the content area! 
 
If you google things like "critically reviewing literature" "critiquing articles" you get lots of documents that pose questions that you should ask yourself when reading the literature. 
 
I like to focus on the methods when I critique an article. (for example, the sampling frame, or the characteristics of the population; what was the study design? was there recognition of potentially confounding variables? what measures were used? how did they define the constructs being measures? would there be a better way to conduct the study?)
 
Also, sometimes if I'm feeling like I'm not sure what I think about an article, I'll just google it. Sometimes you can find other pieces of work that critiqued the piece you're looking at, and you can use that work to cite and build your own argument, or pose questions.
 
A portion of a critique is linking it to other work and knowledge bases, so if you spend a bit of extra time looking at pieces of work that are related to that field, you might be able to understand the major gaps and limitations in that area (literature reviews/meta-analyses are great for that)
 
The biggest things are that it takes time to develop those skills and it takes you always questioning the work you're given! It'll come in time

As a master's student, I taught several genetics labs on my own (i.e. the supervising professor wasn't normally around). I told my students to just call me by my first name, because anything else would be weird. Most complied, but one student kept calling me "Professor [Firstname]." When I explainer to her that I wasn't actually a professor, she just called me "Mr. [Firstname]." I said that "Mr." was still too formal, so she moved on to "Sir." I get that she was trying to be polite, and had probably been raised to address people in this manner... but it was weird for me. Especially since I was raised in a part of the country where the most common way to address a stranger is, "Hey, you!"
 
Eventually, we compromised... I let her call me "Captain [Firstname]." We both thought it was funny. A couple other students even joined in. I love it when a group of students has a nice sense of humor (now if only their work ethic had been just as good...).

I do think that most graduate students like graduate school at least a little.  It's just the culture to complain to other people about your job.  We complain in our department all the time, but most of us will readily admit that we love psychology, we like our department, our advisors are generally nice and caring people who care about our development, etc.  It's far from a hellhole.
 
I love doing research; I love investigating things that are near and dear to my heart, and being able to ask and answer the questions I wonder about.  I love writing and reading and thinking all day long most days.  I love that I'm encouraged to exchange and share information with other students.  I like teaching and exchanging information with undergrads, most of whom are pretty eager to learn what you have to teach them. (Yes, even in statistics.  I had more than one of them approach me and tell me how they really wanted to go to grad school so they needed to learn this.)  I love the flexibility - the fact that it's 11:50 am on a Friday morning and I'm at home procrastinating.  I like that I can, within reason, select what I want to do each semester and schedule my own time to maximize my productivity.  I like the other students in my cohort, and I like our collegiality.
 
I also like what the above poster referenced.  I see this even outside my field.  I'll talk to PhD students in English literature or art history (which are far afield from what I do) and I'm like wow, that is so fascinating!  How do you study that?  Where are your archives?  And when I tell them my research they're the same way.  Of course it's easier within the social sciences, and easier still when talking to other psychology or health sciences students, but I feel like PhD students have this shared bond of being fascinated with scholarship and discovering things.
 
Yes, I'm very busy, yes, I sometimes work 12 hours a day cleaning data or writing something up or god forbid grading, but for the most part I enjoy what I'd do.  I'd much rather spend 12 hours straight writing about something I am really passionate about, or 12 hours analyzing data and watching patterns emerge, than spend 8 hours at a job I hated.
 
I didn't like coursework, though.  I mean, I liked the classes, and my professors were amazing and talented and knowledgeable, but I felt so overwhelmed.  Now that I don't have coursework, I feel relieved and I can manage and set my time much more easily.

waking up at 11

I enjoy almost everything I do in grad school. Except maybe not some of the pointless aspects of some classes, but really overall, I'm happy to be learning it.
 
I think people complain about it because firstly, humans like to complain. But seriously, it's not that we don't like what we do, it's because we are working very hard with not much guaranteed rewards. Grad students work 50-60 hours per week (some even more) for under $30k/year, usually. This goes on for 5-6, or even more, years, and there is a lot of stress in the job as well. Not to say that other jobs aren't as stressful, but for example, there are other jobs that easily pay double the salary of a grad student, for only 35-40 hours per week, and when you go home, you don't have any work left! So I don't think it's that we don't like our work, but generally, the quality of life as a grad student isn't as good as someone with a "real job". When I see what my non-grad school friends are doing, I have to admit sometimes I am a little jealous. But I view grad school as a training phase to get through, rather than the dream (i.e. most people I know don't think "Yes!! I am finally in grad school!" but instead, they are thinking "Yes! I made it to the next stage of my career/life goal! Let's get through this!").
 
However, all that negatives aside, there are huge amounts of positives that outweigh it (or I wouldn't be here in grad school)! My number one reason for going to grad school is to increase my ability to get a job that I will enjoy. Sure, that job might have longer hours and won't pay that well compared to how much effort one needs to put in to get the job, but I don't want to spend the rest of my life hating the 40 hours of week I work and only looking forward to evenings and weekends.
 
The second reason is for the ability to travel. I love travelling, seeing new places, meeting new people, and academia gives me tons of opportunity to do that. When I was growing up, two of the places I wanted to see most in the world were Rome and Paris. Our family thought about a family vacation over there once but when we saw the cost of flights, we knew that it wasn't going to ever happen. But, in 2011, I went to a conference in France and was able to include sightseeing in Paris as a part of it! Grad school gives me the opportunity to have experiences that are not possible any other way. This is also the reason why I am pursuing a PhD instead of just a MSc (in Canada, MSc is what's required to teach at colleges) because lecturers don't get to travel but researchers do! It's also a reason why I went into astronomy-related fields -- observers travel to exotic places and the theorists, being jealous of observers, often plan their conferences in tropical/exotic places too!
 
The third reason is personal freedom and flexibility. I like being able to set my own schedule and to some extent, make decisions in my work. I would not be as happy with a strict 10 days holiday that have to be booked in some strict protocol and a supervisor that tells me exactly what to do all the time. I know this is not true for all jobs, and that academics are still constrained by funding, grants etc, but having worked in "blue collar" jobs before, I know I definitely prefer the freedom of an academic.
 
Finally, the last reason is that I enjoy science and the process of research! Although this appears last on my list, it doesn't mean I don't like academia at all. But if I had to prioritize what I was looking for when choosing an ideal job, I wouldn't mind a job that doesn't involve science or research if it fit the other 3 desires! Anyways, I like grad school because I am surrounded by people with similar scientific interests and motivations. I enjoy the sense of family with my cohort, that we are all doing this together and I know I can count on their support. I also like the sense of community in my field -- conferences are like mini-reunions with people you haven't seen in awhile. You also quickly build up an entire network of people whose couch you can crash on all over the world!

Say what?  This forum is full of stories about why people do what they want to do and why they enjoy doing it.  I haven't seen a single thread where someone says "God I hate graduate school, but I have a gun to my head so there's really no choice for me. . ./sadface."

What a fantastic thread with amazing advice. It's so encouraging to see people out there who are enthusiastic and motivated to make the classroom an engaging interaction where students and instructors learn. You all have really provided golden tips here! Having read this thread, I can already feel myself evaluating what I do and changing things. Thank you!

I am 99% confident that SSHRC results, regardless of the competition level, will be announced no earlier than April!

For some poster design tips, I would recommend this blog: http://www.betterposters.blogspot.com  People volunteer to send in their posters and the authors give a critique and everyone learns!
 
In the past, I've used PowerPoint (actually OpenOffice Presentations) because it was free. If you can get free access to something like InDesign, that would be super awesome!
 
As for posters vs. presenting a paper, I guess this is field oriented, since we don't usually "present papers" in mine. Most conferences are either poster or oral presentation (which may or may not be a paper that's already written -- sometimes it's just an update of their work or a single cool result). Oral slots are generally more prestigious than poster talks because when there are time/space limitations (almost always), oral presentations are generally assigned in some priority order and then the remaining spots get posters. In addition, some conferences will limit you to just 1 talk submission but unlimited (or many more) poster submissions. I guess the hierarchy would be Invited Talk > Contributed Talk > Contributed Poster. So, I would recommend that people always select "Talk" when given a choice between Talk or Poster but a poster is still better than not attending the conference sometimes!
 
That said, posters are still a good way to get people talking about your research, to show that you have experience presenting/communicating your work on a CV, to network and it's usually what most people present at their first conference. I also like presenting posters because (1) it forces me to get the poster finished and printed before leaving for the conference, so that I don't procrastinate and end up working on my slides during the conference and (2) I feel better speaking to people in small groups / one-on-one during poster sessions than to talk to everyone in the audience at once! However, the downside is that a talk is over in about 15 minutes (in most conferences in my field) while you might have to stand next to your poster session for 3-4 hours while everyone is at the coffee table! 

Hey, I think we all feel a sense of competition with other students and lab mates. And I promise you we all have that one student who we secretly hate because they're just (in our minds) out performing us.
 
I think, as uromastx said, you should use this as motivation. Push yourself to meet standards and expectations that you might not have otherwise sought. Considering you say that your supervisor is pretty hands off, this is actually a really great thing! Also, and I'm going to contradict myself in the next paragraph, use it as a way to compare your work/progress to what you know your supervisor likes. What I mean is - I'll use an example - I read a comprehensive project from another student in a different department. This student is like, Einstein. I read their comp and literally needed 2 bottles of wine to calm myself. I was like, "*%^$), my work is WAY below that....I need to pull my shizzle together and up my game". I used their work as a standard that I want to meet...and by comparing my work to theirs, in this sense, I improved my output (or will be...soon....I'm still drinking that wine).
 
One the other hand, and this is where I'm going to contradict myself, your degree is about YOUR progress. Don't compare timelines, amounts, etc. too much...because everyone works differently and has different situational factors that influence their output. And just because their birthing papers left, right and center, doesn't mean they're exceptionally quality- right? It's important to step back and ask yourself: are you meeting YOUR and your supervisors goals/expectations? Have you set a timeline, and met the critical points? At the end of the day, you'll each graduate with the same degree, how you got there and the time it took doesn't really matter - on some levels...there's always a caveat!

Hi there!
 
I just wanted to start off by saying that you're probably not alone with those feelings. I think we've all felt intimidated at some point in grad school! But I wouldn't cut myself down, you're clearly skilled and experienced enough to have gotten this far! And you're motivated and eager to develop your critical and analytical skills- so that's great!
 
As far as changing the way you read/think about literature- it takes time and knowledge in the content area! 
 
If you google things like "critically reviewing literature" "critiquing articles" you get lots of documents that pose questions that you should ask yourself when reading the literature. 
 
I like to focus on the methods when I critique an article. (for example, the sampling frame, or the characteristics of the population; what was the study design? was there recognition of potentially confounding variables? what measures were used? how did they define the constructs being measures? would there be a better way to conduct the study?)
 
Also, sometimes if I'm feeling like I'm not sure what I think about an article, I'll just google it. Sometimes you can find other pieces of work that critiqued the piece you're looking at, and you can use that work to cite and build your own argument, or pose questions.
 
A portion of a critique is linking it to other work and knowledge bases, so if you spend a bit of extra time looking at pieces of work that are related to that field, you might be able to understand the major gaps and limitations in that area (literature reviews/meta-analyses are great for that)
 
The biggest things are that it takes time to develop those skills and it takes you always questioning the work you're given! It'll come in time

Think of your PhD as a means to an end. You've invested so much time, effort and money into it- it seems like a shame to not finish.
 
As far as the length and content of your thesis- that's dependent on what your advisor, committee and discipline want. Try and remember that a Masters is not necessarily about generating new and earth shattering research, it's about developing the skills, tools, and experience to conduct research. As insignificant as your research may seem, the process of coming up with a question, doing a lit review, conducting an experiment, doing data analysis, and writing/presenting results are all valuable skills.
 
While it seems like you're obviously not interested in grad school - which is totally ok - it would probably be worth your time to finish it up, since you're so close.
 
Also, the length of your thesis is not a representation of the quality and/or significance of the work you've done. 
 
As for your topic, I'm not in your area...but to me it seems like a decent project. You outline, as Seeking said above, the history of androids  their relevance, and why battery power is important. present your experiment - adding to the code - see if it changes battery life, results, discussion/implications/limitations, BAM- done. Throw in a few tables and graphs..and BAM WHAM...done even more!

That's awesome! Good luck! You can do it!!

I just have to say, I don't think I've ever experienced a graduate school discussion that was heated or oppressive...maybe it's the culture here in the Maritimes, but 'most' of the students always raise their hand to speak, and typically aren't critical of others' ideas- we might pose a question that asks the other student to think about the topic from a different perspective, but I have never experienced another student being harshly critical or demeaning to another. I do know students who over engage in class (*waves her hand*), and recently I've been trying to limit myself to two-three short points/comments/questions to a 3 hour class, but honestly- it's how I learn. 
 
I learn by discussing and talking, and hearing other people's ideas/points, because it makes me question/think about my own opinion. I think a lot of people, like myself, don't realize they're taking hold of the class. I find I talk more when no one talks, because I want to fill the awkward silence. I also talk more when I'm engaged or excited about the topic - or when I know participation is part of the evaluation.
 
I guess you can choose whichever way you want to go. I have to agree that not speaking probably won't solve anything- as you'll most likely just get absorbed into the background. But my biggest thing is that I would feel I'm not learning or getting what I need out of the class. I know when I sit back and stew about a students/topic/issue, I glaze over the content and miss opportunities to learn- and I might be worried that if I sat back and watched the landscape unfold, I would be overlooking the content that is being raised in the discussion.
 
With all that said- I think it is the professors responsibility (along with the students) to manage and direct the discussion. And I think you did the right thing by commenting on the issue- they might not know that this is an issue in the first place, and so you're allowing them to correct it. But also, I think as the others have said, redirecting the conversation back is a good way to develop the skills that your professor seems to lack!
 
Honestly, I don't know what you should do. I think you're in a difficult situation...and I'm probably one of those students you would be upset with! BUT, coming from that perspective, I would want to know if I'm 'too much', so maybe talking to them or commenting in a nice but to the point way would be helpful to you, the class, and them!

Yes, you can do this. You need to make an outline, then basically try to fill it in with what you've already done and what you already know. Then you can go back to the literature and add in the supporting information and flesh things out. Basically, you're probably falling into the trap of reading more than you need to and using that to procrastinate on writing. Break the habit.

Try and write a little bit every day. It can seem overwhelming to sit down and write an entire thesis..but if you start early and just write down thoughts and summaries from what you read, you will realize in no time that you have a lot to put towards your thesis.

I need some good new reads for my bedtime.
 
I'm slowing making my way through the third Game of Thrones book, but I always like to have another novel on the go for when that gets too heavy.
 
I'm currently reading the fantastically easy tween book: The Name of the Star http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9802372-the-name-of-the-star
...but I'll be done soon!
 
Anyone have any good recommendations? What are you guys reading? I thought I would shock this thread to life...especially because it allows me to procrastinate!

Thanks guys, for all the great advice. Next time, I will take the approach of mixed language usage to make our communication more effective. 

I just have to say, I don't think I've ever experienced a graduate school discussion that was heated or oppressive...maybe it's the culture here in the Maritimes, but 'most' of the students always raise their hand to speak, and typically aren't critical of others' ideas- we might pose a question that asks the other student to think about the topic from a different perspective, but I have never experienced another student being harshly critical or demeaning to another. I do know students who over engage in class (*waves her hand*), and recently I've been trying to limit myself to two-three short points/comments/questions to a 3 hour class, but honestly- it's how I learn. 
 
I learn by discussing and talking, and hearing other people's ideas/points, because it makes me question/think about my own opinion. I think a lot of people, like myself, don't realize they're taking hold of the class. I find I talk more when no one talks, because I want to fill the awkward silence. I also talk more when I'm engaged or excited about the topic - or when I know participation is part of the evaluation.
 
I guess you can choose whichever way you want to go. I have to agree that not speaking probably won't solve anything- as you'll most likely just get absorbed into the background. But my biggest thing is that I would feel I'm not learning or getting what I need out of the class. I know when I sit back and stew about a students/topic/issue, I glaze over the content and miss opportunities to learn- and I might be worried that if I sat back and watched the landscape unfold, I would be overlooking the content that is being raised in the discussion.
 
With all that said- I think it is the professors responsibility (along with the students) to manage and direct the discussion. And I think you did the right thing by commenting on the issue- they might not know that this is an issue in the first place, and so you're allowing them to correct it. But also, I think as the others have said, redirecting the conversation back is a good way to develop the skills that your professor seems to lack!
 
Honestly, I don't know what you should do. I think you're in a difficult situation...and I'm probably one of those students you would be upset with! BUT, coming from that perspective, I would want to know if I'm 'too much', so maybe talking to them or commenting in a nice but to the point way would be helpful to you, the class, and them!

Well, the best proactive way to solve this problem (that I can come up with) is helping them learn the English terms, and maybe in the process you can also learn some terms in the other language. If you otherwise know the language, simply start writing down terms you don't understand or that you think your colleagues don't know. Find out what they mean, tell them. Rinse, repeat. You probably want to declare that you are doing this and explain it as an effort to improve communication in the lab, and you may want to get your advisor's support in doing this. If spun in a positive light (you want to understand them better, be able to participate more, whatever) then hopefully no one will be offended by you "teaching" them English or them having to teach you basic words in the other language. With your advisor's help, they may also understand that it's important for them to know the English terms if they want to be part of the larger scientific community beyond their lab. But probably part of making this work would involve you learning some of the language they are using, because taking a step in their direction is helpful when you are asking them to take one in your direction.
 
(ignoring discussions of what happens when some people in the lab don't speak the other language at all, and the appropriateness of using other languages in such settings -- concentrating on a low-level solution only. It's hard to stop people who share a language from using it.)

A big pot of southwest chili.
 
There's this soup that I make where I saute some ground beef/lamb and bell peppers in olive oil. Add a chopped potato, water/stock to just barely cover the stuff and some heavy cream. Salt & pepper. Once the potato is cooked ~15min, the soup thickens. Sometimes I'll add some greens right at the end, and toast some almonds to have on top.
 
Fatteh is also great. Combination of chickpeas, sauteed meat, toasted pita bread bits, and yogurt whipped with a mashed garlic clove and some salt. A sprinkle of paprika on top. Very Lebanese food
Split Lentil soup. Lentils, stock, salt, pepper, and optional: ground beef, chili, cumin.
 
My go-to meals are sauteed chicken/shrimp in some butter+olive oil and with whatever vegetables I have plus seasoning.

+1 to lentils! all things lentil = amazing. i'm a pescatarian with some funky eating habits, so the protein and cost of lentils make them some of my favorite things ever! i cook mine down in a 1:4 mix of white wine to veggie stock, and throw in some saffron or curry powder. mujaddara is the best- i spice my rice with coriander and cumin, caramelize my onions, spin honey into my yogurt, and roast some crushed almonds with brown sugar and sea salt to crumble on top of it all. nommm. i think i know what i'm making for lunch then dinner then lunch again tonight, hah!
 
also, depending on where you live, salmon can be really cheap, too. i broil mine for 12 minutes with light mayo and dill- the mayo sounds gross (i'm not a fan of mayo on anything else), but it keeps the fish soft and moist, and the flavor of the dill makes you forget what your fish is topped with. cheap and easy, especially if you grow your own herbs. 

I do the whole paleo eating thing, so it makes cooking insanely simple. No processed foods, only things with a shelf life (i.e., veggies, fruit, fish, chicken, eggs, meat) and lots of herbs for micronutrients. Although, sometimes I dabble in fancy paleo cooking with recipes I find on different blogs And if you go to farmer's markets to buy your produce it's super cheap. Breakfast is eggs and an avocado, lunch is a salad with chicken and lots of veggies (no dressing), dinner is steamed salmon (or whichever fish is on sale) seasoned with sage, garlic, onion powder, etc over a bed of kale with some raw carrots and broccoli on the side. Easy peezy lemon squeezy!

You live in the world I would like to live in, but for me and Dal PhDer and for others in the writing forum whose posts you can easily look up - and I suspect for the OP as well - the world is more complicated. Sometimes it's not as clear who gets first/second for all kinds of reasons, sometimes you think it's perfectly clear and someone else has their own agenda. There are politics involved with collaborations and you need to handle them in a smart way. That normally includes figuring out authorship very clearly and explicitly, and early on. It should not include making unilateral decisions which may backfire, like trying to dictate to colleagues and supervisors how you think the world should be (even if you're right!). I've personally witnessed cases where more than one person truly believed they should be first and the situation got out of hand because one person just put themselves first without asking; there should be a discussion and if indeed it's as clear cut as you say then everyone should agree, no problems. But sometimes it's not that simple, and those cases are better preempted as early as possible.

The ironic thing with wine-infused wine gums? One version of the story is that wine gums were invented for recovering alcoholics!