pqo309

History turns full circle and the left is reduced to a ceaseless witch hunt, this time for racists. This has nothing to do with a name and all to do with pure hatred. Go away - this forum doesn't need your vitriol.

All this advice is great, but I agree with Loric's step 1. It seems that when it comes to writing research articles, authors make it out to be a race as to who can sound most erudite. So, they consult a thesaurus and bust out arcane words thinking it makes them sound smart or parsimonious (see?), because a simpler word or turn of phrase just wouldn't do. Later, other people who read their articles start to use those words to keep up and all of a sudden, everyone's using crazy words and syntax and you're like, "wut". Bring a dictionary and read, read, read, even if you don't understand a word even after looking it up. (I also tend to skip methodology since it means nothing to me yet)

Didn't touch it with a ten foot pole

I find this discussion to be pretty fascinating and I don't quite understand your hand-wringing, zizeksucks. What is a philosophy forum without some actual debate? I've heard this "academic definition" from a friend of mine before, but I don't buy it. The power requirement is too poorly defined to make such a blanket statement as, "it can't be racism if they don't have power." Does a black condo owner who refuses to rent to a white guy because of his race not have power?

I would not even mention the inability to afford a visit and just go straight to arranging a Skype chat. If they keep pushing for an on-campus interview, then I would bust out the finances card, but not until then. I guess I prefer to focus on the positives.

Great thread. Not sure why some people think it's inappropriate to discuss. As liberal as academia generally is... really? Stop making grad school out to be some soul-crushing convent where different standards apply than to the rest of society. Professionalism is one thing, but geeze.

I'm guessing you guys have never undergone an ERP test.... At least you can blink while you do these! Post-attempt edit: I should've tried it before opening my big mouth. I agree with them. Why are there so many options? I mean, seven seems excessively gray. Why can't you just use two - literal or metaphorical? And maybe a third for "I don't get this" so you can strike out stimuli that don't make sense.

I moved to Japan for school many years ago, so I think I can relate. You're nervous now, but deep down inside of us all we have an instinct for survival. You'll be fine. At least you speak the language

I think this is a question everyone grapples with, but eventually you'll realize ranking isn't important. From what I gather, ranking is mostly based on the research being conducted at the institution and some other nebulous factors. While good research can mean good faculty, there are plenty of rockstar clinicians who don't have a PhD. I say, as long as the school has ASHA accreditation, it is meeting minimum standards (which are plenty rigorous in themselves), and that should be good enough. This field seems to attract a lot of overachievers, but there's only so much you can learn in two years, even from the top schools, so consider your own standards and what you think matters (which you have), and decide based on that. Besides, the demand is so high, you'll find a job no matter where you go.

Kacikins, Yep. The website is totally outdated and kinda disorganized, but I guess that's par for the course for my hometown!

Well some schools use a central application service for Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, but their grad school still wants a cut so they'll use a supplemental app. I tolerated it for two schools, but when I saw another one (one of my top picks, incidentally) require that plus GRE scores be sent to them and the central application, I lost it. What a shame, but I can only tolerate so much abuse - and that crossed the line (I despite ETS).

I've made a few mistakes, sent GRE scores and paid supplemental fees for schools I'm no longer interested in and I'm frankly fed up. Many schools want two separate applications, two sets of GRE scores, two sets of transcripts and, of course, two fees... Who the heck do these people think they are?? I'm sick of all the hoops. Anyway, that's my rant. Thanks for indulging me.

Balance is really interesting. It's a big reason I applied to Nebraska (they're affiliated with Boystown, which does a lot of vestibular research).

I would agree with AuD2018 in that they're both similarly competitive - while fewer people apply for AuD, the cohorts are a lot smaller. However, from the admissions data I've seen for schools, incoming AuD students are quantitatively less strong than the SLP stats I've seen. Diversity in academic background is more valued in audiology, so that might be why. Then again, I don't buy into the "numbers matter" ideology. I think if you're a decent student with something concrete to show the adcomms, you have as good a chance as any.

It probably differs for each school, but I know Nebraska-Lincoln will recirculate the funding of people who don't accept admission. Also, AuD funding is generally much more generous that SLP funding.