The Sum of All Fears

I read these online forums obsessively--these PhD admissions forums, where PhD hopefuls like (and including) me go and engage in sometimes enlightened discourse about the application process.  Sometimes it seems a little like the blind leading the blind.  I know there are some "hopefuls" around who know quite a bit more than I do about the PhD process (after all, I never really even considered a PhD until about two years ago; some of these folks have known since they were a freshman in high school.  OK; maybe that's an exaggeration, but you get the point), but the truth is, none of the other "hopefuls" on there have trod this path either; they're in a situation pretty similar to mine.  So it's a kind of laughable that I hop on and troll about looking for bits of sage wisdom from these other folks who, by and large, are ALSO searching for that golden bit of advice.

At any rate, I'm off topic already!  I was on today reading through profiles of folks who've received admits, and came across this signature:

Pr(Admission) = ∑ (all fears)

I thought is was pretty funny.  Not sure if I read it correctly, but I THINK it means "probability of admission equals the sum of all fears."

That's funny.

Although, I think it'd be more appropriate if it were:

1 - Pr(Admission) = ∑ (all fears)

At any rate, that's me; it's where I live.  Maybe not truly the sum of all fears, but it's hard not to obsess about Pr(Admission) when you've finally committed yourself to this drastic life change.  Because the worst thing would be fully committing yourself emotionally to this path and after all the work, all the effort, all the sacrifice, it coming down to a list of rejects and no admits. 

It happens.  I found a few on the online forums.  And they weren't unqualified applicants either. 

So I hedge my bets (by casting a wide net--applying to too many schools), and do everything I can to enhance my profile (working on a new research project with a new group of researchers, by the way; did I tell you?).  But still, the fear persists.  Because there are things hanging out there (like my undergrad GPA) that are just enormous blemishes on my profile.

If you're reading this, and you find yourself in a similar position--you fret and obsess and worry (until your hair begins to fall out and you've started biting your fingernails again, a habit you conquered ten years ago) about your chances of admission--I hate to tell you, but I don't have any magic words for you!  I do, though, stop periodically to reflect on a particularly apropros quote by Goethe:

"Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back-- Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth that ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now." 

I comfort myself knowing that there's power in commitment; that a higher power (Providence if you read Goethe; perhaps, if you're a little more spiritually minded like me, God) steps in and moves on your behalf.

Good thing.

To GRE or Not to GRE?

That IS the question.

You see, two of the schools that are on my list, it turns out, will only accept the GRE for the program I'm interested in (as opposed to the GMAT--which I took).  The first program is a longshot for me (one of the top 2 or 3 programs in the US), and it's not really one of my preferred programs (although it'd be hard to say no if I was accepted), but I don't think I'd take the GRE if it were just for that school.  But I was scouring the website of one of my other prospects the other evening, and found that it requires the GRE as well.

So now I'm torn.  This second program is a respected program (maybe 20-50 range), with high research output.  And as it turns out, I was introduced to a professor there at a recent conference; we had a great conversation and she's made subsequent email introductions to a few of her colleagues there in the department.  So, now, I feel like I really SHOULD take the stinkin' GRE. 

Grr...

I was REALLY looking forward to being done with the whole aptitude test thing.  All that studying, and prepping; if I take the GRE, I'll have to do it all over again.

I dunno.  Should I?

CV Draft Done...But the Stinkin' SOP!

I've completed the first draft of my CV.  It's actually a pretty solid CV!  My research experience already rivals someone who's been in a PhD program for a few years (2 major conference presentations, one regional presentation, one paper under review at a reputable journal and two other research projects in progress).  And I've got some great work experience (a very high level research oriented management role at a large manufacturing company).  All in all, I'm pretty proud of the CV.  May have a chance to add an item or two to it by app time.

The SOP is the thing that's getting me.  I've started it.  Twice.  And it just doesn't seem to flow right.  I feel like I'm devoting too much to time in the beginning to the "history" thing (the "how did you come to be interested in what you're interested in").  I've got a great story--one that does a good job of taking me through my professional career (and the SOP as written really does a good job at extrapolating the really cool things I've done in my professional career and how they play into my foundation for a solid, successful career in academia), but it seems like by the time I get down to my specific research interests, they're buried beneath the story.

That doesn't seem right.

I dunno...maybe you can help me?  I'm under no illusion that this blog is widely read, but I know a few of you read it; those who've gained admission to a few programs, tell me about your SOP. 

SIOP Presentation

One academic presentation down.  Not really a presentation, exactly; it was a poster session which means, for those non-academic folks out there reading this (incidentally, if that's you, why are you reading this?  Seems boring...), that you prepare a poster outlining your paper--the overall concept, your hypotheses, your research methodology, your results and conclusions.  Then you place that poster on a wall along with 20 or so other researchers working on related research.  Then people walk through, peruse the various posters and, occasionally, ask questions about the research.  A few even request that you send them a copy. 

It was a neat experience.  Probably not the most glamorous sort of presentation, I know; I think my wife initially had this idea that hundreds of people would pack into a hall to hear me expostulate on my lofty findings, all hanging on my every word.  Not quite like that.  But still very rewarding.

Hard to explain it because, in a sense, it's like writing your first novel and, pre-publication, boiling it all down to a few pictures posted on a bulletin board, and standing next to it as folks meander by, every once in a while stopping to ask a question.  When you think about it, it seems like it cheapens the work.  But that's not really true.  It allows you to expose a work in progress to the rest of the world.  Perhaps some get to know the work a little better; a few get to know you (a great thing if you're planning to pursue a PhD at their university); and a few provide you with pretty valuable feedback. 

So, all in all, it was a pretty rewarding experience.  I'm glad I got to experience it.

Next: a presentation at an international conference in early July (I'm going to Italy!). 

On another note, I had a chance to meet with some faculty from a number of other universities while I was at the conference.  One of my recommendations took me to a reception and introduced me to a few folks who he knows from a few other universities.  Turned out to be a very valuable experience; two of the folks I met are from universities I'll be applying to this fall--both of the universities very highly regarded (high research producing schools).  I've already been in email contact with one of the profressors, and she's brokered email introductions with four other faculty members!  Pretty excited about that!

Also had a chance to sit down with to faculty members from a very prestigious university--one that's rapidly rising toward the top of my list.  They're going to be working with me and the company I work for on some research beginning next month.  It'll be a great experience; I'll get additional research exposure and likely have at least one additional paper accepted to the Academy of Management conference next year (I can put it on my CV at app time even though it hasn't happened yet).  It'll also, likely, result in at least one additional publication by the time I start whatever program I go into.  Of equal importance, I've developed a pretty good relationship with two very influential people from a university that I'm increasingly attracted to.

All in all a good thing!

The thing that worries me most...

...about academia is the obscure wit exhibited by so many truly smart people (like professors).  I stumble around on the web a bit, reading various professors' musings from time to time, and quite often, when you read the stuff academics write in their spare time, it's full of content that you know is supposed to be funny, but you can't quite figure out why.

And I find myself looking around guiltily, ready to break out in phony, raucous laughter if somebody seems to be watching just a little too closely (like they could ever really know that I was just too dumb to get the joke).

And this scares me.  Because these people are going to be my colleagues someday.  I wonder if they offer, in PhD programs, a course called "Snarky Academic Humor"?  If so, I'm going to take it; if not, I'm going to institute it when I'm finally a prof.

At any rate, back to why it scares me: the worst feeling in the world is "not getting it", and when you walk away, knowing beyond all doubt, that "they" are laughing quietly at you.

"Oh my goodness Harold!  I don't think he got it!"  (soft chuckles behind cupped hands).

"I know, Claire.  It's just so sad, isn't it?  How in the world did he get a job here, do you think?"

Whatever.

Final word: some things just shouldn't be allowed to be funny.  Examples?

-"funny" thing with latin phrases in them; out.
-unlikely kingdom-phylum-class-order-family-genus-species pairings; these are really only funny to like 8 REALLY smart people in the world.
-jokes with exponents in them; nope.
-jokes that draw on obscure cultural references (as opposed to popular cultural references); uh-uh.  Think about it, if you tell a joke that draws from some cultural reference that you KNOW only 2.5% of the population is going to understand, then you're just an elitist.

Probably more, but I'm running out of steam.

OK.  Now I'll get back to the real deal: preparing for an eventual PhD.  Did I tell you I started a Calculus class today?  Took one long ago but it was just that; long ago.  Thought it would be a good thing to brush up (and demonstrate how my quantitative prowess makes up for my pathetic sense of intellectual humor).

It's fun!

Next Week: SIOP

A while back a paper I'd worked on with a group of researchers was accepted for presentation at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) annual conference in Atlanta.  I didn't realize this was a big deal going in, but it seems it is.  Particularly for a guy who is applying to doctoral programs (it indicates to admissions committees that you know what you're getting yourself into).

So off I go next week to present.  It'll be a great opportunity, too, to meet some of the faculty as many of my target schools.  I've built this enormous list of faculty, but it's not a complete as I would like it to be.  I'll have to spend some time first of the week fleshing it out.  I guess the best thing to do might be to go through the conference guide and determine when/if any of those faculty are presenting, then make sure I'm there!

Feels a little disingenuous, doesn't it, to sit in rapture as a guy who you want to want YOU presents his work, then vying for face time after the fact, hoping beyond hope he'll remember you in 10 months?  I don't know; I'm not really that type of person.  I tend to think that people can see through that sort of shallow, self-serving interest.  Maybe not; maybe they expect it.  On the other hand, perhaps it's a tell: if I can't get myself genuinely excited about their research, maybe the program (or at least that researcher) isn't the best fit given my interests?

I think I might've answered my own question!