Kicked out from program

[TakeruK]

3) The applicant "bio" page should be completely separate from the rest of the application.  Meaning the page with name, race, gender, age etc should not be visible and a part of the application packet that is being reviewed by the admissions committee.  Instead, the "bio" page should be removed and a random number should be assigned to the portion viewed and judged by the committee in order to truly make admissions "blind," so to speak.  

Fortunately some schools already do this, but many do not.

I don't actually think this is a good thing and I would not advocate for it at my school. This biographical information should be a part of the admissions process and information like your name, race, gender, age etc. should play a role. But I will clarify and say that this is the point of view of someone in a long, research-based PhD program, not short professional programs.

I think details such as race and gender should play a role because it is important to view our applicants as people with histories and backgrounds, not just a bunch of statistics. For example, I think an admissions committee should treat an applicant with a 3.7 GPA during college while working a part-time job to support their family different from someone who achieved a 3.7 GPA without having to work at all (because their family paid for their college or maybe because they won scholarships in high school etc.). Similarly, a single parent applying to an astrophysics PhD may not have summer research experience because they were a single parent and could not afford additional childcare. Without the extra biographical information, this applicant will not be able to compete against applicants who were able to obtain research experience in some other way.

In my opinion, because it is impossible to judge people on purely objective means (i.e. GPA and other numbers) and because judging people purely on these numbers does not really truly measure merit (see examples above), I think that removing the biographical information actually make admissions less fair! It creates a huge advantage for those who are able to score highly in whatever metrics each program provides because there is no information about the real person behind the application to put these numbers in context.

Of course, a committee can use this information "for evil" and discriminate on the basis of gender, race, age, etc. However, I take the less fatalistic approach of believing that we can train ourselves to recognize conscious and unconscious bias and make fair decisions.

And finally, removing the biographical information does not really work in my field. We're fairly small and if you include important information like the publications you've had written, your name will be there. Also, if you are a really strong candidate, it is possible that someone will recognize you simply from your anonymized details. And even if you are moderately strong, it's common contact faculty members ahead of the application cycle. Faculty are smart people, they will probably be able to put two and two together from their prior interactions with you + your application information.

[Jolie717]

Also, not a fan of the insinuation that I'm so out of reality I must be on mind altering substances.  

Wow - for that I am sorry.  It (my comment) was meant to be funny and "lighthearted."  We are obviously on different pages - so I apologize if I have offended you regarding mind altering substances.  Damn Liberal Californians, lol!!!  And like I mentioned previously, I think we could have a *real* conversation that would be interesting and meaningful, but a forum chat is not the place.  As I've learned, 60-70% of communication is non-verbal.  I honestly don't have time to dissect everything you and I have said on this thread - so I will just let it go at this point.  Best of luck to you - and hopefully one or hopefully more readers will gain some insight when reading through this thread.

[skeener687]

Obviously, you should apply again with no mention of your attendance at un-said university. While for some people this is dishonest, I personally believe that your past is nobody's business but your own. I also see no other option for you. The only hurdle you may run into is getting financial aid. Universities claim that you must send ALL transcripts, but I found this to be not true. It may be a risk, but it's one worth taking if you have no other options. Good luck.

This is terrible advice. It is only advisable to leave out information about your past if it is irrelevant to your application, like your high school work experience at Pizza Hut. Being dropped from a program due to unsatisfactory academic progress is COMPLETELY relevant and cannot be omitted. I can almost guarantee that leaving that information out, rather than being honest, would not work in your favor. Also, how is the system flawed? Honestly, do you think someone who was given a spot in a competitive SLP grad program and couldn't cut it deserves to have their slate wiped clean, to be on equal footing as every other applicant? I'm not saying no one deserves a second chance, but that person needs to work even harder to prove him or herself as worthy of an acceptance!

[GradSchoolTruther]

I'm guessing the OP is leaving a lot of things out to garner sympathy.

[OverCaffeinated]

This is terrible advice. It is only advisable to leave out information about your past if it is irrelevant to your application, like your high school work experience at Pizza Hut. Being dropped from a program due to unsatisfactory academic progress is COMPLETELY relevant and cannot be omitted. I can almost guarantee that leaving that information out, rather than being honest, would not work in your favor. Also, how is the system flawed? Honestly, do you think someone who was given a spot in a competitive SLP grad program and couldn't cut it deserves to have their slate wiped clean, to be on equal footing as every other applicant? I'm not saying no one deserves a second chance, but that person needs to work even harder to prove him or herself as worthy of an acceptance!

true but harsh. i agree though. as painful as it is. a lot of us are killing ourselves to get into the program (me personally..) so it doesnt seem fair... :/

this is a terrible situation  

[Lasagne89]

I just found out I am in the EXACT situation. I've had enough and I don't know what to do...my gpa is dead, there is no way another school will accept me. Plus the admissions for fall 2016 are over. Honestly I just feel like sleeping and stairing at the ceiling for the whole day, I'm not even motivated to wake up and take a shower. I spent the last 3 years giving everything I got to enter the Master's program (took plenty of classes to boost my gpa for admission, volunteered with many physiotherapists,shadowed a bunch of them etc) and now it's all down the drain after a first desastrous year. Do you know anyone who recovered from such a failure?

[GradSchoolTruther]

26 minutes ago, Lasagne89 said:

I just found out I am in the EXACT situation. I've had enough and I don't know what to do...my gpa is dead, there is no way another school will accept me. Plus the admissions for fall 2016 are over. Honestly I just feel like sleeping and stairing at the ceiling for the whole day, I'm not even motivated to wake up and take a shower. I spent the last 3 years giving everything I got to enter the Master's program (took plenty of classes to boost my gpa for admission, volunteered with many physiotherapists,shadowed a bunch of them etc) and now it's all down the drain after a first desastrous year. Do you know anyone who recovered from such a failure?

A graduate degree is not for everyone, but if you still want to give it another shot, work for a few years and try to apply again.

[Lasagne89]

4 minutes ago, GradSchoolTruther said:

A graduate degree is not for everyone, but if you still want to give it another shot, work for a few years and try to apply again.

I'm pushing 30 years old. I'm not sure what working for a few years and re-applying will accomplish? I did that last year before finally being admitted in the program and it was hell. I have a 9-5 job at a clinic that is not mentally fulfilling to me. Furthermore, after being kicked out I am not permitted to re-apply again to the program. Thanks for your input. 

[jpiccolo]

1 hour ago, Lasagne89 said:

I'm pushing 30 years old. I'm not sure what working for a few years and re-applying will accomplish? I did that last year before finally being admitted in the program and it was hell. I have a 9-5 job at a clinic that is not mentally fulfilling to me. Furthermore, after being kicked out I am not permitted to re-apply again to the program. Thanks for your input. 

For the record, many people do advanced degrees at 30 or later. And I can say this as at least 3-4 of my cohort are in their 30s and two are in their 40s! And they have some of the best background and experience to bring to the table, often as teachers, nurses, etc. We are pretty widespread from early, mid, and late 20s too but we all get along super well. I wish I had some magic advice for you but I hope things work out for you!

[Lasagne89]

 

17 minutes ago, jpiccolo said:

For the record, many people do advanced degrees at 30 or later. And I can say this as at least 3-4 of my cohort are in their 30s and two are in their 40s! And they have some of the best background and experience to bring to the table, often as teachers, nurses, etc. We are pretty widespread from early, mid, and late 20s too but we all get along super well. I wish I had some magic advice for you but I hope things work out for you!

You're right, there are people in their late 30s in my program as well. But that's not my point....In my mind I had it all figured out that by 30 I'll be DONE with school, have my degree, a decent career as a PT, , a house, a car and *maybe* a husband lol. This situation is a MAJOR drawback, it's not like I failed one class and have to repeat it, no I am completely DISQUALIFIED from the program. out. dunzo. back to square one. 

I do hope things will work out from me but right now I can't see the end of that stupid tunnel. 

[Jolie717]

On September 6, 2015 at 0:43 AM, TakeruK said:

I don't actually think this is a good thing and I would not advocate for it at my school. This biographical information should be a part of the admissions process and information like your name, race, gender, age etc. should play a role. But I will clarify and say that this is the point of view of someone in a long, research-based PhD program, not short professional programs.

I think details such as race and gender should play a role because it is important to view our applicants as people with histories and backgrounds, not just a bunch of statistics. For example, I think an admissions committee should treat an applicant with a 3.7 GPA during college while working a part-time job to support their family different from someone who achieved a 3.7 GPA without having to work at all (because their family paid for their college or maybe because they won scholarships in high school etc.). Similarly, a single parent applying to an astrophysics PhD may not have summer research experience because they were a single parent and could not afford additional childcare. Without the extra biographical information, this applicant will not be able to compete against applicants who were able to obtain research experience in some other way.

In my opinion, because it is impossible to judge people on purely objective means (i.e. GPA and other numbers) and because judging people purely on these numbers does not really truly measure merit (see examples above), I think that removing the biographical information actually make admissions less fair! It creates a huge advantage for those who are able to score highly in whatever metrics each program provides because there is no information about the real person behind the application to put these numbers in context.

Of course, a committee can use this information "for evil" and discriminate on the basis of gender, race, age, etc. However, I take the less fatalistic approach of believing that we can train ourselves to recognize conscious and unconscious bias and make fair decisions.

And finally, removing the biographical information does not really work in my field. We're fairly small and if you include important information like the publications you've had written, your name will be there. Also, if you are a really strong candidate, it is possible that someone will recognize you simply from your anonymized details. And even if you are moderately strong, it's common contact faculty members ahead of the application cycle. Faculty are smart people, they will probably be able to put two and two together from their prior interactions with you + your application information.

Huh, not sure how I missed your post the first time around.  But yes, as you stated, PhD programs are a different beast.  There is a much smaller applicant pool, and the selection and interview process gives a more intimate look at the applicant.  This is necessary for both the student and the advisor, due to how closely they work together and the years (and $$$) committed to earning the degree.  Many of us here after completing our "short professional program" are planning to pursue PhDs.

I disagree, however, that race or gender *needs* to be mentioned on the application in most instances.  And the SOP is where we reveal our background and history, not the boxes you check for your race and gender.  I was a working parent and supported my family throughout my undergrad, and yet my race and gender were not mentioned once in my SOP.  In fact, I would be willing to bet if my name were omitted, most readers would assume I was the opposite gender.  Letters of recommendation can also reveal a lot about an individual without disclosing race or age, for example.  Gender would be difficult to eliminate, for obvious reasons.

An exception to the rule as far as including identifiers, for me, would arise if a specific race or gender (or age, etc) had been historically underrepresented by an educational program or programs.  This is a very contentious topic however, probably best debated in another thread.  

You stated:

"Of course, a committee can use this information "for evil" and discriminate on the basis of gender, race, age, etc. However, I take the less fatalistic approach of believing that we can train ourselves to recognize conscious and unconscious bias and make fair decisions."

I guess I must take the more fatalistic approach.  Here is some light reading about bias in the admissions process, and GRE.  I think it gets even worse when you examine bias in hiring and the workplace.  But again, a topic for another thread, or another forum perhaps.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/06/new-book-reveals-how-elite-phd-admissions-committees-review-candidates

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-harberson-asian-american-admission-rates-20150609-story.html

http://aspiringdocsdiaries.org/bias-in-the-medical-school-admissions-process/

http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/11/07/gre-bias

[TakeruK]

@Jolie717: I think your points are great and I agree with you too! I chose to write that old post arguing for the merits of one point of view, but I do agree with you that it's not so simple. I do think about the things you wrote as well, and I recognize that these ideas are contentious. I also agree that it's pretty tough to have a deep conversation about a topic like this in this medium! Since writing that post, there has been many discussion events at my campus about some of these topics---several hours worth of events! And even after all those discussions, I feel like there is more that can be said. 

I still think my overall views from the old post mostly stand, but I have changed my mind about some things based on these discussions. One example is bias in decisions and I think it's time to remove the GRE from the decision making process because it's a biased and faulty metric. It also doesn't provide any useful information! So, while I still think the solution to removing bias from the workplace is to train the bias out of people, I want to be clear that I do think there can also be changes in the way information is provided in the application process (e.g. maybe the first stage should be name/gender/race blind etc.)

(P.S. I am hoping the Physics GRE and General GRE will disappear from a lot of applications next year in my field. My field's national society has officially endorsed a position urging department heads in the US to remove them: https://aas.org/posts/news/2015/12/presidents-column-rethinking-role-gre)