BrokenRecord

Hi all, Needless to say grad school has been pretty tough thus far. It isn't necessarily the work that is so treacherous as it is other life issues (moving across the country, adjusting to living alone, being away from partner, adapting to a completely different culture, etc.) I am taking about 15 credits this quarter (no research or teaching obligations) of which two are the standard, non-departmental foundational courses for public health (biostatistics and epidemiology). I'm doing reasonably on biostatistics with room for improvement but with epi I just completely tanked the midterm with a 47% (the mean was 70% which is passing, so no real possibly of a curve). There are other chances at this point to get a passing grade (extra credit, big class paper, etc.) but not a comfortable enough chance to not have to worry about pushing out an A on every assignment from here on out. I will still be at full time (11 credits) should I decide to drop epi. I am still contemplating on dropping the course for two major reasons: 1. I do not want to stress out with this class when I have two other classes that are in my department, specifically with a potential advisor and one with the program chair. I have not been putting a full effort into those classes as I should, and given that it is in my department, perhaps reducing my courseload will give me more opportunity to devote to those two more important courses. 2. I have a pretty much guaranteed PI who has expressed interest in having me come and work with him in getting familiar with data analysis for a new project he is working on. Let me backtrack by saying that in our masters program we don't have to choose an advisor yet, but it surely wouldn't hurt if we get started on any type of research or project as early as possible. Our funding this year is taken care of, but the second year maybe an issue depending on if you can find a PI with funding as an RA. He is a senior professor with a lot of pull as far as funding and outside connections is concerned. We work really well together and I want to be apart of the project as it really excites me a lot. For this reason, I think if I sacrificed epi at least this quarter while I have a chance to, it may be better to my advantage than pushing getting started on this project. I'm going to speak with my program manager, but I just completely feel at a loss. Just soliciting from some advice from you all. Thanks!

Wow, very similar circumstances happened in my case. I had a "Patricia", who was my best friend/colleague and milked me for information to use for her advantage in getting a really prestigious summer internship. I could never imagine doing what she did to her. I try not to be hardened, and I'm pretty much over it until topics arise which remind me of it, but ultimately it has taught me to always be cautious and guarded, especially when there is an element of competition amongst "friends".

This is where you are mistaken. The primary goal of industrial hygienists coming out of my graduate program is not spearheading OSHA laws or merely being 'safety inspectors' (needless to say those jobs only require an associates degree and relevant experience), but to actively work on prevention of workplace accidents. Very different concepts. The surge of wokers comp claims have rose dramatically within the Great recession so employers are looking to hire IH's, specifically if they have a specialty in ergonomics and risk assessment, to reduce barriers to safety in the workplace initially, not to ensure if they are in compliance with OSHA like EHS inspectors. In that, it requires a good grasp of mathematical modeling (risk assessment) in addition to an understanding of OSHA laws; beyond the training of safety inspectors. This is the reason why the vast majority of industrial hygienists coming out of my program are employed in the 'free market' as you put it, in manufacturing-based fields (construction, auto, wine, coal, oil industries) and not government. But you are correct, there is virtually no competition in my field, not because of having a 'guaranteed job because of legislation', but because of relevant skill sets which are attractive to a company seeking to up their prevention controls and thus cut costs. Supply and demand in a free market economy. And notice in my initial quote I stated applied, marketable skill-set. Just because a field has some real-world implication doesn't mean that it's marketable. Auto-engineering? Definitely applied and it seems like they are in big demand. Perhaps it is program specific, and I am not sure about the stats as of now, but there were a staggering number of unemployed chemists. Chemical engineers? Not so much. Again, I will agree to disagree. Ultimately, individuals have to make the choices for themselves in their own respective career paths. EDIT: I'm glad you found a great project to work on, I know it was a rough first week. Glad you stuck it out! Good luck!

Ditto. That's the only thing that crosses my mind when pondering if I am making the correct decision to move from coast to coast.

I beg to differ. The reality is that most professional-level jobs are not advertised over the internet. Especially when you add in PhD to your search, the overwhelming majority of PhDs in those fields don't go on careerbuilder or even send a resume'---they are actively recruited before they graduate. To gauge there is only a demand for roughly 28 toxicology PhDs when there are hundreds which graduate every year would effectively put some of them into unemployment, which is obviously not the case. I'd also have to disagree. Again, nanotechnology is not marketable in a theoretical sense to which physicists would work on (hint to my previous suggestions), but in my more applied research (environmental implications of nanotechnology; environmental health, nanoporous membrane technology aka water purification systems; engineering related) it is highly marketable to utilize those technologies but also understanding its potential health effects. I still have to concede that while it may be fun doing research for theoretical "knowledge sake", you will be far better off with an applied, marketable skill-set in this economy. But to each is its own.

That is appalling!! When you have those people controlling the majority of the thought, it is really a testament of why more diversity is needed in academia.

I know I'm going to veer off a bit from the seeming consensus on this thread thus far, but I personally wouldn't do exactly what the email suggested. To me, it is acceptable (and encouraged) to discuss articles read or even read them together before the seminar, but sharing your own written work will not bode well for you, especially if you may want to turn those summaries into a literature reviews for a publication or a chapter of your thesis/dissertation. No diss to your classmate obviously, but his motive was definitely clear to me, because if he truly wanted to "understand" the material more he would have suggested you all to do it together and get a flux of different ideas, rather than relying on one person's interpretation. But it is a lot easier to read a written heavily-summarized piece, rather than reading the entire article themselves. Then what will happen in this discussion when everyone has the same ideas? It seems to me you have a gut feeling that something is amiss---let that be your guide in this and anything else you encounter, it will never fail you. Wildviolet, I'm far from experienced in anything grad related at an age of 22 soon to be 23, but I do know a little something about life and the nature of people. I think you hit onto something that was quickly dismissed in my opinion, and that is the competitive climate of academia. I don't think what you are feeling is a result of "public school indoctrination of wanting to be better than anyone else", but simply a very staunch reality of life, especially when you have other mouths to feed in addition to yourself. In this economic climate, no job is guaranteed, even for us science folks, but especially for those in humanities and social sciences were academic jobs are very scarce, it is important to look out ultimately for your own long-term career mobility first rather than the temporary cohesion or 'likability' within the cohort. After all, these are the same people you will be competing with for the exact same jobs, and to think that they will think of how nice you were or how much you've helped them when an opportunity arises to benefit them to the exclusion of you---oh buddy--not in a million years, BELIEVE me, been there, done that and got burned, badly. You don't want to learn that lesson now when it will affect you the most. This is not to say don't collaborate or share ideas, you should and it can only be to your benefit, but be strategic, kind and never put all your eggs in one basket, if you know what I mean.

I don't know too much about the financial field, but if hedge-fund modeling is something you want to do, that in itself is very research-based and not necessary management-based where work experience is the big factor. Again I'm no authority, but I would assume you'll have a much better opportunity in that quant of a field with a PhD and a few relevant publications under your belt rather than a freshly-minted MBA, especially if it isn't from a top 7 program. Given the financial crisis, it seems that more advanced math/stats PhDs are becoming more marketable than an MBA. Is there anyone in your department doing work in this particular field? Or perhaps something cross-disciplinary with the finance department? Ultimately, the big thing is to make sure pursuing a PhD is something you want to do. I'd say finish this semester and reassess. In whatever way, you're lucky you are in a field that is in demand and highly versatile depending on which sector you go into with the education you currently have now. Good luck and welcome!

Dal! I'm so sorry I didn't read your comment before posting my own. But you essentially summed up exactly what I was thinking and I commend you for breaking mold in your family; I'm the first one to pursue graduate school in my own. Although my family is definitely better off now, we also went through a period of pretty bad suffering especially throughout high school and college when my parents divorced. It was rough, and in college I didn't have the luxury of calling home to my mother for money as my friends did. Like a previous poster I've also had to take out loans in order to help my mom. I'd do it over again in a heartbeat and still would. All of that as you know makes me greatly appreciative of my funding for graduate school as I wouldn't be able to go without it. I don't fault people for being more privileged than I (and I even consider myself privileged), but what I do mind is this seemingly subconscious know-it-all complex that prevails affluent people, as if they understand all that ails poor people, when in actuality they don't know anything.

*Thread hijack* I find it quite ironic how you preface your assertion by stating a qualifier "I taught high school in an inner city district". You may have "taught" in an inner city district, but it seems to me you have failed to really teach yourself about your students and the circumstances of their surroundings outside of the confines of your classroom. To suggest a "big" part of the achievement gap is due to poor students making "bad" choices really ticks me off. No, a BIGGER part of the achievement gap is having privileged people come into inner cities, 8-5, leave the classroom and go across the tracks back to their respective green-lush suburbs without interacting with the actual environment that those who you've taught had to live in and thus, making authoritative commentary about how they know the BIGGEST problem which ails their academic success. Have you ever stopped to think that a "big" part of poorer students making "bad" choices are those choices based upon SURVIVAL and not just "bad advice" like their affluent counterparts? Have you ever known any of your students whose parents tell them to not come in the house until they have such and such money for rent, no matter if they have to steal, rob, etc.? Survival. An affluent teenager drinking or smoking dope? Bad choices. See the difference? Sure, we all to some extent know right from wrong, but how can you instill that moral depth in a 5 year old when they grow up in an environment where a human life isn't even valued? Where they can't play outside without fear of being shot? Take that contrast to an affluent 5 year old, who is taught to value the environment, the polar bears, the trees and other nature-oriented things? It's staunchly different worlds. Perhaps I'm being too harsh, but I see this "blame the victim" attitude all the time, as if poorer students are somehow incapable of making good choices. That is simply not true. A responsibility of privilege, like I was fortunate with, is daring to be uncomfortable with your surroundings. Want to know poverty and suffering? Try going to a minority-serving institution for college and living smack in the middle of the projects, as I've done and even others have done a lot longer than I have. Do that for a few years and I'm sure you will see how these kids arrive with their "bad choices".

Exactly! It was pretty impressive until you hit "I went to work for the family business"

This! If I were to be judged based upon my spending habits I would be dirt poor. If you know where to look, it is very easy to find last minute airfare, trips, cruises or anything you want on a bargain. I am a huge shopper, but only shop for 70% or more off the original price on nearly everything I buy. My whole room (shared townhome) is furnished with stuff from the "as-is" clearance isle at bed bath and beyond. Sure, you have to dry clean the curtains, wash the sheets, deal with a scratch on the dish, but it is worth it having high quality, expensive furnishings for way less than the low quality, "cheaper" competitors. In my case, I am far from poor, but not comfortable enough with money to blow it. I like having the security in knowing that I have money stashed away in emergency funds. My partner is well-off so I'm fortunate to have him help out while in school. I'm lucky, no doubt about it, but I'm quite miserly and tend to scrimp when I can (except on nutritious, good food and laundry soap). But in a greater sense, I don't think children of privilege generally pursue research-based graduate programs as it is kind of hard to pay someone to write your thesis or take your comps No but seriously, most who pursue graduate school now do so out of a financial necessity, as a means to (hopefully) a better paying and more fulfilling career---at least that is the case to my understanding in the hard sciences. I think liberal arts/humanities tend to have more well-off students in general, but being bankrolled by your family helps you get ahead with those already-established connections,

Apart of me really hates that my program starts super late (September 24th)! Ughhh...just anxious to get started and going!

How often do you eat out? That is quite a bit for a single person, but I guess it depends on your location.

Great point that I completely overlooked! I'm in a hard science field which is fairly straight forward sans knowing how to do fairly complicated risk models. But I have noticed even with my social science work that some articles are just complex and overly verbose for the sake of sounding "intellectual". In the words of Albert Einstein, "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"