Graduate students judging you

[psych face]

I just spoke with a professor today about the "insider information" posted here, that graduate students do the initial screening of our applications for professors at schools that get a lot of applicants. He seemed really surprised things have become like that, and looked as dissappointed and annoyed at the system as I felt when I read that here.

 

Then we had a conversation about how qualified a graduate student would be to judge another (potential) graduate student's potential, when it is well known to be a dog-eat-dog, arrogant, ego-filled world (academia) - also depends on the department. For example, it would be easy to see how one graduate student may reject another for extremely poor reasons that have nothing to do with merit, especially after reading personal subject matter that might be mentioned in statements. Graduate students also lack the perspective to really understand what it takes to survive the program, since they have yet to do so. I would hope that only a select few graduate students are chosen for this job, carefully screened, themselves.

 

Another thought I have that irks me immensely is that my statement was tailored for my potential superiors, not their minions. There is information contained in there that is either unsuitable for future "co-workers" of mine, or information I would never have included if I knew who exactly was going to be reading it. If I had known ahead of time that I was to be selling myself to graduate students, things would have been tailored very differently.

 

The professor I spoke to about this was one of my letter writers. He was pissed off that he thought he was writing to his colleagues when he wrote his recommendation and in stead, a bunch of "Little Shits" were going to be reading it. Of course, this language is why I love my letter writer.

 

This topic only arose because I saw him this morning and he asked me if I was all stressed out now that all my apps were in and I could freak out waiting. So I told him, "No, I'm just freaking out now because I found out yesterday that GRADUATE STUDENTS are screening my apps." Just thought I'd see if anyone else had any thoughts about this.

 

Of course, if you are currently a graduate student (as am I) and don't see yourself as a "little shit" I understand. But, being a graduate student myself - I do agree that the term is fairly representative.

[Gvh]

Eh, I get why you (and others) might be upset - but I don't see it as a huge deal. After all, they are living through it, and might understand some aspects of grad school that are different from when their supervisors were grad students. In the end, they aren't the ones making the final decisions....they most likely do the initial screening to bag the really terrible apps that come through. 

 

I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

[ImHis]

Yes, even professional programs like medical or law schools also have students on the admissions committee. It's disturbing because there's no way to control for their own personal biases.  I'm keeping hope though and I firmly believe the right school will find you

[FinallyAccepted]

Last year, one of my letter writers told me to expect this. In fact, I hadn't heard anything else about it until it was mentioned on GradCafe, so I wasn't sure if that was how it STILL worked. I wonder about the extent to which this is true across the board, though. Would all professors really allow grad students to have so much control? I mean professors want the best applicants. They wouldn't truly allow someone else to jeopardize their lab and their legacy. Right? So the autonomy granted to graduate students doing this can't be TOO absolute and the trust necessary to relinquish this control must be merited.

My response to the poll above would really have been "Yes, and while I'm not freaked the hell out, it is something I worry a little about"

Edited December 2, 2014 by shana.teacher

[iphi]

I found this out last year when I applied, and it made me a little annoyed that all the hard work (and MONEY) I put in might not even get my app read by a professor. But I also understand that some schools get a ridiculous amount of applications, and from a university's perspective it makes sense. If you have a high volume of apps the "stand out" students are going to be fairly obvious to spot. Also, I assume more than one graduate student reads them, so it evens out some biases.

[athlete2academic]

I did not know this occurs. It's interesting, really.

 

I was lucky enough to intern in two high-profile labs this summer at a large, research-orientied university. Rarely did I come in contact with the actual professor who headed the lab. My day-to-day interactions were with graduate students. Granted, not many were first or second years; the majority were third and forth years with deep experience. Assuming that all graduate students hold themselves to as high a standard that my summer "colleagues" did, I would have no problem with them screening my application. 

 

I agree with earlier posts to an extent, though. Graduate students are competitive by nature - probably a reason they're in the position that they're in. That said, I would hope a graduate student would not "toss" my application because he/she sensed...a threat (not sure of the correct term here).

 

All in all, I'm not uneasy about it. It's just part of the process, I suppose. I applied to 8+ programs, all of which I consider to be "big." My question is...what's big?  

[informant]

Oh boo freaking hoo, psych face. You are a student I would probably reject if you made it to our interview phase, because you're so freaking unpleasant to listen to. Your insecurities have sullied my good intentions. I have things to lose too, you know. Goodbye, you little shit.

Edited December 2, 2014 by informant

[psych face]

Oh boo freaking hoo, psych face. You are a student I would probably reject if you made it to our interview phase, because you're so freaking unpleasant to listen to. Your insecurities have sullied my good intentions. I have things to lose too, you know. Goodbye, you little shit.

 

Wow, that is just not something I expected. I hope that was sarcasm. There are sometimes people with odd attitudes that end up around here.

[Eigen]

Just FYI, your post title seems out of context with your message. 

 

Are you talking about students sitting on admissions committees and looking over applications? This is extremely common, and accepted practice. 

 

But you chose the word "screening" that indicates that they are making the initial cut of which applications get to the rest of the admissions committee or not, and I'd be extremely surprised if that was the case. 

 

That said, while Informant worded his post poorly, your initial post was.... lets just say insulting to current senior graduate students who do hold those positions. Highly so. Especially calling us, as your letter writer put it, "little shits". 

 

If my department and faculty think I'm qualified enough to help go through applications, why are you (and, I suppose, your advisor) who don't at all know me casting aspersions on my ability to do so?

 

::edit:: I see the post that started this all now. Two or three schools using a student committee =/= a general poll suggesting it's common practice.

[geographyrocks]

Did you know that when you interview for a job there is the possibility that you are more qualified than the person interviewing you?

 

Just saying...

 

And although it may happen at some schools, I can tell you applications ARE NOT decided by grad students at the school I attend.  I can't imagine my department is that unique.  Although, we don't receive the quantity of applications that some departments do.  Still, I can't imagine that graduate students "decide" on who should or should not attend.  I would think they get the job of thinning the herd by looking at stats and tossing any that don't meet the standards.

 

Edit: Your poll is biased, and it's bugging the hell out of me.  The downfall of taking too many stats classes...

Edited December 2, 2014 by geographyrocks

[AvatarPsych]

As someone who just went through the application process, I know that words and feelings get extremely heated. It's a stressful process, and everyone wants to feel as though they are given their fair shot during the application process. 

 

However, as a graduate student, your first post, albeit fueled by emotion, is really quite offensive. I am not a "little shit." I am no one's "minion." In fact, I came to graduate school so that I could have my own work recognized. I went through the process just like you, and I think that the characterization of the field as one that is "dog eat dog" and "egotistical" is a little out of context. 

 

When I went on visits to schools, students were nothing but pleasant. You have to realize that after your application process, there is a whole other world on the side here. You're in a lab. You're working together. Your POIs didn't build their reputations themselves, and the people doing the work with them (notice I didn't say FOR them, but WITH them) are graduate students who were qualified enough to beat 600+ other applicants to be there. 

 

This is not a field where you can fight past and make it on your own. You need to collaborate and work with people. 

 

Graduate students are in no way deciding your fate. However, if you have someone who applied for a POI who isn't even taking students that year, do you think it's right that a professor, who has 1 million other things to do, take their time to figure that out when it will automatically disqualify them? Someone needs to screen. Emphasis: screen. That doesn't mean throw the application away. If the professor doubts the applicant pool, they will go through and look at it for themselves and see if someone's application should be resurrected. 

 

You should also understand that students have a huge incentive to themselves look for and pick the best candidate, as they will not only be working with these potential future students, but that these students will work to build the lab's reputation after they're gone. 

 

Now I'm not saying that graduate students are the most important part of the process, I get it. But was I upset last year when I was applying and found out grad students were looking at my application? No. Because I had confidence in my application that if I was really meant in that lab, I would make it through, and rightfully on my credentials. Not my own irrational perception that there was automatically a bias against me. 

 

This is a process that has been working for a while and has been crafted to fit each program's needs, interests, and the demands of an increasingly competitive applicant pool. 

 

*Edited to add:* Grad school is not the hunger games. Granted, it may feel like it at times, but mostly everyone makes it out alive. 

Edited December 3, 2014 by AvatarPsych

[KW58D]

I'm not terribly worried about it. Since these programs are designed to shape graduates into potential faculty members it really isn't surprising that these students would be part of the admissions process. Did I know this occurs, no, but I would not have done or worded anything different. I write to my audience which is program personnel, regardless of being a student or faculty member.

[when]

I'm not sure this is as common as is suggested. In any case, it wouldn't really bother me. I'm sure only trusted, senior students are given such a responsibility. I know one faculty member at my school who asks one of her upper year PhD students to also interview candidates, and I know that student is definitely professional and capable enough to provide a fair and useful evaluation from her own perspective.

[lewin]

I have some ambivalence about all this. One the one hand, I think I'd be comfortable with senior graduate students being tasked with, e.g., cutting out the bottom 20% of applicants. It doesn't take a genius to weed out the candidates with 2.8 GPA's, 65th percentile GREs, and letters that say "So-and-so was in my third-year lecture class. He scored above average."  Consider it the desk rejection for grad school.  Really, somebody at the faculty of graduate studies could do this.

 

That said, I'm would be uncomfortable arriving at a program knowing that other students had read my reference letters. There does seem to be an expectation of privacy on the part of both letter writers and applicants, where they assume their materials are going to professors. I also don't that typical graduate students have the expertise to assess candidates more in the middle (to quote George Costanza, "in the meaty part of the curve").

 

Last, to be clear, I have no problem with students on admissions committees. This is strictly about students screening out applicants as a first stage of the process.

[GeoDUDE!]

I'm a graduate student and I'm judging you.

 

But on the real, change the title so it more accurately connotes what you want.

[_intrigue_]

That said, I'm would be uncomfortable arriving at a program knowing that other students had read my reference letters. There does seem to be an expectation of privacy on the part of both letter writers and applicants, where they assume their materials are going to professors.

 

That's a really good point. I'm uncomfortable with the idea that my future peers will know potentially intimate details about my life that my letter writers chose to disclose. Plus the fact that I myself won't ever know what's in those letters...

[CogPsych2015]

Really, how common is this? My undergrad institution (that I'm currently at) is an R1 with a relatively large program and I know for a fact that we do not do this. I'm just saying, it may not be very widespread...

[TakeruK]

Really, how common is this? My undergrad institution (that I'm currently at) is an R1 with a relatively large program and I know for a fact that we do not do this. I'm just saying, it may not be very widespread...

 

None of the schools I've been to actually use graduate students to screen (i.e. actually reject) applicants. However, many schools have senior graduate students be part of the admissions committee. Most of the time the grad student rep(s) cannot vote but they can provide their opinion on applicants as well as the decision process. I think it is important to have graduate student representation on admission committees because graduate students have a vested interest in admitted students, since such students will be our future colleagues and it will affect our working environment. Also, I think it is good to include grad students for a larger diversity of ideas/thoughts (many profs may be very far from their graduate student days!!).

[lewin]

^^ This thread was inspired by another thread where somebody said Berkeley psych does this, and possibly Michigan. Screening, not committee members. I agree it's probably not common.

Edited December 3, 2014 by lewin

[TakeruK]

Ah, thanks for the clarification

[Eigen]

That's a really good point. I'm uncomfortable with the idea that my future peers will know potentially intimate details about my life that my letter writers chose to disclose. Plus the fact that I myself won't ever know what's in those letters...

A lot of people are talking about "peers" vs "faculty", but I've never seen junior grad students sit on these. It's usually senior grad students.

And no matter how you cut it, the 5th and 6th year grad students are closer to being peers with the faculty than they are with the incoming first years. I also get asked to give feedback about the younger grad students progress, and the faculty discuss worries they have about junior students progress with the senior grad students.

Accordingly, I'm not sure why you'd feel uncomfortable to have one reading your letter this year, but not next year as a post-doc or a junior faculty member.

[spunky]

i fail to see why people are freaking out over this. who has the time to go over 100s of applications? i mean, profs themselves sometimes don't even have the time to glance over the grades of their own students! Clinical Psych over here got more than 300 applications. Counselling Psych was also close to 300 for the MA. you can bet your brownies that no prof is gonna go over 300 applications looking for 'the one'.  there has to be some sort of systematic process that lets you filter out say 90% of the applicants or so. just to cover my rear end here i'll say... i'm pretty sure that in some departments (maybe mine, maybe not) there could (or could not) be some sort of.. you know... hypothetical 'checklist' which a hypothetical someone (or group of someones who is/are hypothetically not  profs) use to create these hypothetical 'yes' and 'no' piles. and only the 'yes' pile hypothetically makes it to the profs. such is the nature of the beast

 

in another surprising development: graduate students can also be reviewers of manuscripts being submitted for publication. yes, the possibility exists for a lowly PhD student  to end up rejecting the manuscript of some hot-shot researcher if the adivsor of said PhD student is falling behind his/her reviews and decides his/her PhD student could benefit from wasting a weekend going over a backlog of manuscripts. i know i've looked at my fair share of manuscripts throughout my years in graduate school. 

Edited December 3, 2014 by spunky

[Munashi]

I'm at an R1 and in my program, we get about 150 apps for ~3-5 spots.  Grad students don't do initial screenings of applicants here.  That doesn't mean they aren't consulted at all, but we certainly aren't sitting around choosing which apps go in the garbage and which get passed to faculty.

It does not surprise me at all that some places do this.  I sort of doubt it gets used as a deciding factor, but perhaps student opinion is taken into account/considered by the faculty.

 

But then again, our field is pretty small.  Divide 150 by the number of faculty taking students, and it's a pretty reasonable number for each person to go through.  I can see the advantage of using a student to screen for "absolute no" apps.  The idea doesn't bother me personally.

[juilletmercredi]

This isn't a widespread thing, but I think graduate student input on applicants is very common.  Thankfully, the vast majority of professors don't treat their graduate students like "little shits" or "minions", but rather like junior colleagues who they are training to eventually take their place (figuratively, although sometimes literally).  At a certain point in the program they value your expertise, and an advanced graduate student isn't all that different from a new assistant prof tbqh. 

 

 

For example, it would be easy to see how one graduate student may reject another for extremely poor reasons that have nothing to do with merit, especially after reading personal subject matter that might be mentioned in statements.

 

Just like you take it on faith that your professors are sane, professional people who are interested in the growth and preservation of their labs and programs - and don't deny students because they don't like their hair or something - you have to take it on faith that the graduate students are too.  Any grad student selected for this kind of thing is probably quite advanced and has proven themselves to be sane and professional and unlikely to reject a student for "extremely poor reasons that have nothing to do with merit."  Although I do have to break it to you that grad school decisions are not made entirely on merit anyway.  Some personal subject matter doesn't belong in personal statements, and many professors will react negatively to that, too.  In fact, I daresay a lot of grad students would probably be more sympathetic.  Read that "kisses of death" article that was posted in the other thread.

 

Graduate students also lack the perspective to really understand what it takes to survive the program, since they have yet to do so. 

 

A 5th or 6th year ABD has survived the vast majority of the program and has a pretty good understanding of what it takes to make it through.  Enough, I would say, to put a rating on an applicant.

 

Another thought I have that irks me immensely is that my statement was tailored for my potential superiors, not their minions. There is information contained in there that is either unsuitable for future "co-workers" of mine, or information I would never have included if I knew who exactly was going to be reading it. If I had known ahead of time that I was to be selling myself to graduate students, things would have been tailored very differently.

 

I honestly do not understand this.

 

Graduate students are researchers.  Your personal statement was, presumably, tailored towards researchers - researchers who would read it and get a better understanding of what kind of research you want to do and the preparation you have to undertake this program.  What, research-wise, would you have tailored differently if you knew that a 6th-year ABD was reading it as opposed to your PIs?  I hope the answer is nothing, because that 6th-year ABD is going to be judging your research from much the same lens as the PI.  The PI of course has more experience, but that doesn't mean that the grad student is fooling around looking for the chili pepper or something.  A couple of the professors in my department who I knew were involved in admitting students got their PhDs literally a year or two before me.  Some of them are my friends.  And I want my lab and my department to be successful and for my (now former) PI to be successful in his work, so when I evaluated students for him or forwarded him the information for potential students, I only sent along the ones I thought would be good fits professionally.

 

Grad students are also adults.  What could you have written in there that was fine for a supervisor to know but unsuitable for a grad student to know?

 

Your PI WAS writing to his colleagues when he wrote his recommendation.  First of all, the grad students are his junior colleagues, and in probably < 2 years will be his peers.  Second of all, it's not like the professors aren't reading the recommendations at all.

Edited December 4, 2014 by juilletmercredi