Best path for admission to Graduate School? (schools, master's, career)

[K-Luv]

I also want to add that while presentations look great on a CV, publishing looks better. And to be honest, speaking in front of a group of people is a skill that is sort of expected. So unless the presentations are at a major conference within the field, they might not matter much, if at all.

What she should really be asking is whether or not she can get her name on a paper in exchange for her time.

[aus10]

Originally Posted by K-Luv

What she should really be asking is whether or not she can get her name on a paper in exchange for her time.

Excellent advice. Even though my son graduated *** laude undergrad, did some very interesting research in undergrad and had excellent GRE scores (780 analytical), his lack of published named papers in undergrad is what he feels kept him from getting into some of the PhD programs that he aspired to.

[mizzourah2006]

Originally Posted by marigolds6

Unfortunately, the essay section (Analytical Writing) of the GRE really is not considered that much for admissions. Her own writing will be weighted much higher in admissions decisions; and I think departments really do not know yet how to treat that score.
Quantitative Reasoning has a big crunch at the top. Getting just a few points off perfect will put you down in the low 90s already. So, I would no too worried about a mid to low 80s percentile there. What was her verbal reasoning percentile? If that is high 90s like her analytical writing, that should help.

She should talk with the professor's grad students and post-docs. If any of the post-docs have a large number of publications or have been there a long time, that's a huge warning sign. Similar, if masters students are taking a long time to graduate (normally 4+ is long, but I don't know psychology) or PhD students are sitting at "All But Dissertation" for multiple years, that is a big warning sign too.
In my experience with a professor who took advantage of students, that professor was one of the top young researchers with a rapidly growing reputation. And while that professor always claimed to give students a lot of freedom, projects were quickly cancelled or channeled, with the professor landing first author of papers they never even wrote. In other words, a strong reputation and promise to let your daughter develop only her own projects is no guaranteed protection.

If I were giving a year of my life unpaid, I would expect half those presentations to be at significant conferences (with registration and travel paid) and a genuine opportunity to appear as middle author on a peer-reviewed article. (mizzourah2006, does psychology do middle authors? Or do they only do only first and last author or even only a single author like history?)

My advice comes from my experience in geography and biology. I think a lot of it generalizes to other areas, but psychology can still have its own rules.

Yes, psychology does have listed authors, unfortunately undergrads very seldom get on the author list in publications. They typically get footnotes. Although they help with the execution of studies, they often aren't involved in the development of the ideas which is where authorship is typically determined in psychology (Although after reading above it sounds like this situation could be different.)
Now with conference presentations that is different. They can get on poster presentations, but I have never seen one in a symposium at a national conference.

My impression was that the presentations would be at national conferences, if these are just local student fairs or local conferences that may change my tone.

However, it's unlikely she will be able to get anything near publication in one year. I'm also curious as to how the professor expects her to get studies submitted and accepted to national conferences when she hasn't even come up with her research ideas yet. One good research project will typically take about a year to complete. Then you have to get accepted to a conference. It would be tough to do all of that in one year's time. But, I think she will struggle with acceptance because of her limited research experience. So it may be the best move.

[marigolds6]

I didn't think about the time frame aspect. I keep thinking about this like she has an existing working relationship with the professor, but she doesn't.

I had to submit abstracts last week for a conference in July, on projects that I had well underway last summer.
And my few publications occurred a year or more after the research was completed. So, it seems unlikely that she can turn around her own research project enough to be presenting it is time to start applying. She is probably going to be assisting in developing and presenting the professor's ongoing research while working on her own research too.

She is probably giving $20k or so worth of free work and a year of her life in exchange for an improved shot at grad school. I would just apply to grad school first and see how that shakes out. Unlike applying for jobs, you -can- get feedback on why you were not accepted to grad school (especially if she is doing the right thing and developing contacts with professors at those schools before applying).

[Coldjensens]

She is leaning toward taking the position doing research. Some of her applications are due next week, so she will have to decide soon. He told her she should be able to present her honors project from next semester at a conference next year. Apparently It is a complicated project, I am not sure how she will get it done. She has been working on it in bits for a year plus, but no testing yet. I do not see how she will complete testing of 200 plus subjects, analyze the results and write, re-write and polish her paper in one semester. He said she will probably have to enlist some grad students to help in exchange for them getting their name on it. He is apparently pretty interested in this project. He told her there is a way outside chance it could get published if she writes it up well enough.

I am not sure where she would get to present next year's projects. She did say something about poster presentations at one point so that may be what they are talking about (whatever that is). I would assume that if he is saying it will hep her get into grad school, it must be an acceptable level of conferences.

Fortunately the speaking/presenting part should be pretty easy for her. She is regularly in musicals and does singing performances and has done various public speaking things since she was about 12, so that part, which terrifies some, should come easily. I think the hard part will be completing everything. She tends to think big. I hope she does not take on unreasoanbly difficult projects that she cannot complete in a year.

I expect she will have to come up with her projects over this summer, or maybe next semester. I also suspect this may turn into a two year process, since it appears most colleges want two years of research experience. Even if she finishes projects in one school year, I wouls think she woul not present them until the following summer. That would mean applying in the fall of 2014. Maybe she is going to work on the proejcts ovrer this summer, but she is applying for a summer position with another university during this summer. I do not kow how that all works.

The project she most wants to do requires working with children and I guess that takes a lot more clearance than experiments with freshman psych students. She may have to wait to do that.

She has been told by more and more people that re-applying can create issues. They told her a typical grad school gets around 700 applicaitons. Those are divided between the various disciplines (clinical, behaviourial or whatever). Thus, each school for a given discipline is really looking at 100 -150 applicatons. Of those, the top 25% is likely to get serious attention/consideration. They are likely to remember people who get int he top 25%, especially with her very unusual name ("thanks a lot dad!"). Beside they now use computers for the applicaiton process. thus, the computer identifies if someone has applied before and they then must submit an explanation why they are now more appealing and should not simply be rejected again. In fact, at least some of the applications say to include that in your personal statement if you have previously applied.

With both her and her sister, I am amazed at how difficult the process is to pursue jobs that will not pay very well. (Her sister isin music ed, but that is a 5 year undergraduate program).

[OdysseusNY]

if her main goal is to get her PhD at the same campus that she has the opportunity to finish her undergrad at, then the choice is clear

she should transfer to the main campus and try to get some sort of relationship with a professor in the department she wants to get he PhD from (ugrad research assistant, ugrad advisor, ace a class and frequent office hours to do some remarkable extra credit project, etc)

there is nothing more beneficial in a PhD app than a strong recommendation from a professor who works at the department you are applying to. this is stronger than a perfect GRE or 4.0 because there are so many other students who will have these as well

to me it's a no brainer since her goal is so focused. transfer transfer transfer

note I'm not saying it would be the right choice in all circumstances

[karen_in_nh_2012]

I am surprised at some of the advice you are being given for your daughter. I got my Ph.D. from Michigan in '99 and it was EXTREMELY unusual for Michigan undergrads to be accepted as grad students in my program (I recall exactly one in the 5.5 years it took me to finish the Ph.D., and he was absolutely phenomenal). I was in the social sciences (but not psych.).

Graduate admissions are somewhat arbitrary. The year I was accepted at Michigan (which was #3 in my field), I was also accepted by the #1 program in my field (Wisconsin) but REJECTED by everyone else (5 other schools, including one that I had received a master's degree from, albeit in a different field). The year I got in at Michigan, GRE scores were THE main criterion. The year AFTER I got in, where applicants had gone for undergrad was THE main criterion (I would not have gotten in that year). The admissions committee for each academic department typically changes from year to year, so they have a LOT of discretion in terms of what to weight more heavily or more lightly.

Michigan was a FANTASTIC place to go to grad school. I would have hated going there as an undergrad -- it would have felt just way too big.

[marigolds6]

I still go back to my original statement.
The only thing that matters for getting into any specific grad school is having that one professor who wants you to be their student. If you have that, you are in. If you don't, you are not in.

[karen_in_nh_2012]

Originally Posted by marigolds6

I still go back to my original statement.
The only thing that matters for getting into any specific grad school is having that one professor who wants you to be their student. If you have that, you are in. If you don't, you are not in.

I knew NO ONE at Michigan (#3 in my field) or Wisconsin (#1 in my field) when I applied to grad school at those places, and I got into both. No one at either school "knew" me except for what they saw in my application. The head of the admissions committee at Michigan that year was a professor whose area was not even close to the ones I said I was interested in. So Marigolds6, I understand what you are saying and it sounds very logical, but admissions don't always work that way.

[SubconsciousMe]

I feel like I am your daughter--same stats. However, I don't have a Mother and I'm on my own.

Some immediate thoughts--

- Your daughter should have an honors advisor that should be able to help keep her focused and answer any questions about graduate school.
- I am in social sciences and it is considered bad practice to go either straight from undergraduate to graduate or not do 5 years post-Masters experience. Some do it but it looks poorly on applications for the sheer fact education in an academic setting is different than education in a practice setting.
- Graduate schools want to know why your daughter wants to go there. Not putting a resume in essay format, but genuinely wants to know what that school offers that appeals to your daughter.
- I would personally shy away from unpaid research. It is A LOT of commitment, time, and energy. I have 5 paid research positions under my belt, publication, presenting, work with SPSS and NVivo, IRB application and acceptance, and a TA position as an undergrad. I also have an honors thesis. I go to an extremely large university (largest in the nation) where students are numbers but networking is EVERYTHING. It is not practice for undergraduates to do research at my school either but I networked and did it.
- It is considered academic in-breeding to go to the same universities post-undergraduate as graduate but schools understand it is not unheard of. Nor does it impact career terribly.

A few remaining thoughts. Remember when I mentioned networking? A well-known graduate school program seriously wants me because of my presence on social media. Crazy, right? Probably not since my admissions contact got my application fee waived (unheard of at state schools) and will give me a response for my admission acceptance/rejection before they go on Christmas break. Again, unheard of. In a world where students often become numbers--it's not what you know but who you know ;-)

I commend you for reaching out asking advice on behalf of your daughter, however, your daughter does need to do the leg work. She's the one applying and the one that needs to be happy with her decision. You need to follow her lead, not vice versa.