penguin phd

No...

Is it just me or has this thread just been revived after half a year of inactivity?

Sorry, I should probably state that what I wrote is from accounting phd programs, and for similar types of schools, and only based on personal experience (I have no idea how well other people on wait lists did). I was wait listed at many programs when I applied last year (for similar ranking schools as yours), and I did not get moved off a single one. In the end I just accepted one of the offers that I had received early on in the admissions process. In any case, the best way to gauge your chances are to simply ask the schools where you stand on the wait list and what the hold up is.

The probability is probably very low for such schools, but who knows. It also depends on how far down the wait list you are. Since you are on the waitlist, contacting the programs and asking for additional details, such as how many applicants are wait listed in front of you, or whether they have any idea whether the current offers are likely to accept, is likely to help you answer your question.

I didn't mean regarding whether there were actually fish in the sea as much as I meant that if one's attitude about their relationship is that "there are plenty of fish in the sea" perhaps one is not really in the right state of mind to be having a relationship at all.

I'm totally with Indus on this one. Sure you may regret it if you don't do your PhD as some have mentioned. You may also regret it if you give up your relationship for this as well (especially if you find later that the PhD was not what you wanted after all). In the end you have to weigh things for yourself and figure out what is best for you (but definitely try to work it out with your significant other if at all possible). I just don't see how some of the comments here can be so "sure" that the PhD should be the priority for her, and that there are "plenty of fish in the sea" and what not. Such decisions are far more involved than that.

Schools look at your best score. Contact your professors, starting with the ones that you think might remember you, followed by the ones you think are most actively doing research, followed by the rest. See which ones respond. Explain you're interested in accounting PhD programs and need LORs and ask if they're willing to write for you. Include all relevant information, such as classes, grades, GPA, GMAT, etc. Remind them that you got an A in their course. "Remind" them of your characteristics that make you a promising researcher, such as your extensive class participation and natural sense of curiosity, your ability to ask relevant and interesting questions, your analytical abilities, your great writing skills, and anything else you can think of (and hopefully they include these in their LOR even if they don't remember exactly). When I applied, my LOR writers barely even remembered me because I had been out of school for a number of years. The goal is to make this as easy for them as possible, especially if they barely remember you. When I was applying, I created a list of things to "remind" them of my research potential, and encouraged them to use it as an aid in writing my LORs. I ended up getting into several top programs even though my LOR writers are not well known. Preferably you would have all three letters written by professors. If you can't get three, then at least try to get 2.

It's a bit hard to answer this for you.. I suggest you check out a site, such as BYU Accounting Rankings which has accounting ranking by research area and methodology. You said you are interested in financial accounting, so I assume financial archival research. From the financial archival rankings, I would do more research on schools that you would potentially be interested in. It should be obvious, but note that the rankings are not perfect and also a school's rank is not necessarily indicative of how hard it will be to get accepted. For example, on this list Baruch is ranked higher than schools like University of Michigan and Harvard. However, I'm pretty sure most people don't see Baruch as the stronger school and it is definitely easier to get into than the other two. Also a school such as Texas A&M might not seem like it would be difficult to get into, but it is quite competitive. I think most people who are new to this process underestimate how competitive it is to get into these programs. It's not like getting into an MBA program and schools that aren't highly regarded MBA programs might be top PhD programs. For example one might think that it should be a walk in the park to get into an "average" school such as Ohio State, Indiana, Illinois. Though this might be the case for their MBA programs, it's definitely not the case for their PhD programs. For you, I'd just focus on schools on the list that are obviously not as elite, browse a few school sites (specifically the accounting PhD section), and try to get as much information as possible. Specifically, check out faculty profiles to see what kind of research they are doing and see if there is generally a good fit with your own interests. See if they have any information on the sites regarding current student profiles (work experience, typical GPA, typical GMAT, etc). If you are really interested in a school and they have a scarce amount of information, perhaps you could try contacting the PhD director of the program for more information. Actually it might be an even better idea just to check out current student profiles and reach out to students that are currently in the program. They will probably be the most upfront and willing to spend a decent amount of time answering your questions. Anyway, I think it is difficult for forum members to give you substantial details about most programs (except the one we are attending), so it is best to seek it out yourself.

If you write about how you wanted to get into accounting research since your freshman year, you'll have to do a very good job to make it sound convincing. This is because it seems strange that you state that you have been interested in an accounting research and teaching career since freshman year yet you did not bother to get to know your accounting professors well enough to get a good letters of recommendation from them (as you probably know, letters of recommendation from research active professors are probably more valuable than ones from your bosses). Also, given that you knew you wanted to do this, it's strange that you did not reach out to research active professors at your school to try to obtain some research experience. Therefore, I don't think I would mention in your SOP that you have wanted to do this since freshman year unless you have a way to make it really convincing. Other than that, I think if it would be at all possible for you to retake the GMAT and score at least 650 or preferably above 700, it would make you a much more attractive candidate. I think the rest of your profile, though not spectacular, should be okay for getting you into a program.. but perhaps outside of the top 50.

What, specifically, is your question?

Following your own reasoning (i.e., academia doomsday scenario), the 150 hour rule won't change a thing in improving job security for accounting professors. If online education is sufficient for accounting 101, and intermediate accounting, why would it be any different for whatever courses accounting students have to take at the upper levels (often just more of the exact same accounting coursework that is taken at the undergrad level, some MBA type electives, CPA review, etc.). If you think accounting professors are screwed, based on your previous posts and arguments, you should continue to think so under the 150 hour rule. Like I mentioned in your other thread, I think that some of your comments do make sense, and the future job outlook is not totally clear to me. There are just a lot of factors at play. However, as many others mentioned, one of the main reasons to attend a full-time MBA is for the networking and recruiting opportunities... things that you won't get online. I am quite sure that MS accounting students won't care as much about these networking opportunities as MBA students. Accounting students just want to get the hours to sit for the CPA and get licensed, and they could probably care less whether they earned it online, in a classroom, or whatever. I don't see demand for MBA education to decline in the foreseeable future.. in fact I expect it to continue to generally rise for a long time. Even at the insane costs for an MBA these days, most MBAs still agree that the investment was well worth it (assuming they didn't attend a really crappy school). Think about the alternatives today for a high income these days... you could go to law school, medical school, engineering, business. The law job market is crap nowadays, the costs are just as high as an MBA, and it is way more work, and does not offer as much flexibilty as an MBA. Medical school is a good option, but it is also extremely hard, many years of education and loans, and many people won't be able to get into medical school anyway. Engineering... again too hard for most people. Thus, I find business to be a very mainstream and relevant major and profession that most people are attracted to. To conclude, I think there are various reasons why accounting professors might continue to enjoy stable and good jobs, but the 150 hour rule is not one of them (i.e., it does not counter any of your arguments with regards to online education).

Based on your response (I.e., with regards to most students wearing jeans and tshirt) I assume that you are talking about everyday dress code once you are in the program. But if you are referring to the flyout interview, which the original question was asking about, then I disagree. One should go into the interview wearing a suit just as you would for any other business position. I assume most of us have worked prior to entering the program. Ask yourself how you dressed for you interviews in your last job. Business casual is what you normally wear to get a job at best buy. So unless told otherwise, it is probably a good idea to just go in a suit. With regards to grad students looking awkward in suits in an interview. Again, I have to disagree with that given that most of us had jobs prior to starting down this path and are more than comfortable wearing a suit.

Ask the program. Otherwise suit and tie

Where does most business phd attrition occur? I am guessing that it is in the dissertation phase, as opposed to the coursework phase? Am I correct? Also am I correct in guessing that the drop out rate is roughly 20-25%? Or is it lower than this?

In my opinion, Steve's criticism of your written ability was "good, right, and fair". I would normally be more understanding of this, but since you seem to be kind of a prick, honestly, the problem with your writing is that no one on this message board understands what you're trying to say. It hurt my head just to read your last post, and I gave up trying to interpret it after the 3rd pass. Perhaps Steve wasn't trying to evaluate you linguistically, but he was trying to figure out what you were even trying to say. There's a huge difference. Also, there is no way that I'm going to believe that in ANY masters or phd course that you are reading 30 or 50 papers... stop talking nonsense.. you're only making yourself seem uninformed. I would say the limit is about 15-20 papers a week. And although I find it possible that masters students read 4-6 papers a week, they do not read it at the level that you read it when you're in a PhD program. Sysco, I would advise you to work on your writing ability. Also, work on your attitude and tone in your messages.

Just curious, why do you think BYU and PAR are better than UTD's rankings? Doesn't it make sense to rank on the publications in the top 3 accounting journals? Also I didn't know that US News ranks PhD programs in business?

Fairly common sense... but something along the lines of "I am writing to withdraw my PhD application. I have accepted an offer at another university. Thank you for considering me." should be sufficient. You could throw in some additional language as needed.

$5K is peanuts in the long run and I wouldn't make a huge deal out of it. My bigger concern is the fact that they're basically forcing you to make a decision in 10 days. My question is whether you really want to go to a program that treats you like that. Although most programs would love for you to just accept their offer, any reasonable program will want to make sure that you are making the best choice for yourself and that you will be happy with your ultimate decision. I don't think most programs would want you to make a quick decision just to end up miserable at their programs or asking yourself what if you had held out for another program. If you have not already done so, I would contact the other schools you are waiting to hear back from and inform them that you have an offer. Also inform them of your situation to see if they can't speed things up a little, or at least be aware of your situation.

Ok, the paper is titled "International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality" by Barth, Landsman, and Lang. If you put the title into google, it will be the first SSRN link. The quote that I used (i.e., "Finally, the coefficient on SPOS, -0.0438, is negative, although not significantly so, which suggests that NIAS firms more frequently report small positive earnings, consistent with managing earnings towards an earnings target.") is at the bottom of page 30, although I think they have many examples of such inference throughout the paper. I really appreciate any light that you guys could shine on this, and whether their analysis is correct.

Here is what it says in the paper: "Finally, the coefficient on SPOS, -0.0438, is negative, although not significantly so, which suggests that NIAS firms more frequently report small positive earnings, consistent with managing earnings towards an earnings target." Note: when they say "not significantly so" here, I believe they are referring to statistical significance, since the Table shows that the coefficient is not significant at the 10% level. Also, note that this is an accounting paper, which has been published in a top journal and is very widely cited. Also, note that accounting papers often are not flawless both in terms of econometric methods and in terms of language (for instance, in many papers they refer to multiple regression as multivariate regression). Although this is just one example of a paper that writes this, I see this kind of inference in many papers, which has me a bit confused.. So is this proper inference?

I'm reading research papers and I have some confusion regarding statistical significance. For example, a paper might state "education is positively, but insignificantly related to salary.. Therefore, this suggests that the more education one has, the greater their salary." Is this a correct statement? To me, I always thought that statistically insignificant meant that the results were meaningless?

That is interesting, and I've noticed the same thing in past years as well. I think some people just have too much time on their hands. Perhaps they seek to demoralize others who have applied to the same programs, but to do this serves no real advantage or benefit other than to take pleasure in seeing other people freak out (since many academics or academics in training appear to have somewhat high strung personalities) .

Depends on school. Ask PhD director.

I have seen both business casual as well as suits being worn. For one particular interview, the PhD director told me that the dress code would be business casual. However, I would play it safe and wear a suit to all interviews unless told otherwise.

I was wondering if anyone knows the P(acceptance|flyout) (as opposed to P(acceptance|phone interview)) or both? The answer to this question is obvious. Depends on school, and even year. Some schools do calls and no flyout, some schools do both call and flyout, some schools only call you to tell you that you are invited to flyout, etc, etc. If you are ask to flyout at some schools, you are almost nearly automatically accepted. At other schools you are 1 out of 10+ fly outs, and they are accepting 2. With a flyout your change of acceptance is somewhere in (0,1]. That probably didn't really answer your question, and therefore I always tell people to just ask the program director of your specific program directly. Also, how does the flyout interview differ from the phone interview other than the obvious physical presence? The answer to this question is obvious. First, see above. Second, you kind of answered it for yourself. Third, during flyouts you typically get to meet with more faculty, as opposed to the 1-3 (usually 1) you usually talk to over the phone. You get to meet with more of the PhD students. You typically get to sit in on one of their research workshops or seminars to see what that's like. They want not only to make sure that you are a good fit for the program, but that you find the program a good fit for you. You get to physically visit the campus to see whether it is somewhere you'd want to spend the next 5 years in. do they ask different questions? Refer above. do they give you brainteasers? No. Do they mainly want to meet you and make sure you aren't insane or grotesque in some way? or is it a higher level test than the phone interview? Refer above. should we read a few papers of the professors we said we want to work with? This is not necessary, but you can if you like. Perhaps read the abstracts of some of the published or current working papers of professors you're interested in working with. That way when they ask you why you want to attend XYZ you can cite some of their recent research as stuff you are interested in... no need to go into heavy details unless you really know what you're talking about, or you might risk saying something silly. Ideally, you would ask more questions, and let them do most of the talking. For the most part, interviews (both phone and flyouts) are fairly casual.