phdinaccy

-snip-

-snip-

-snip-

-snip-

I heartily second this. Maybe I was reading things into the OP that weren't there, but I also came away with the sense that consulting the activity in general was being referred to. Either way, this forum is dripping with the "curse of knowledge" (a la Chip and Dan Heath), and as a result the multiple meanings of certain terms ("consulting", among others) may get lost in the forum's singular emphasis on the PhD lexicon. I think the very methodical nature in which the OP laid out the case for and against PhD studies speaks to a skill set that may be applied well to PhD studies, if he or she decides that is ultimately the path to pursue.

Actually, I don't find that too surprising. If you're anything like me, my knowledge of the math tested in the GMAT had peaked between my junior year of high school and freshman year of college. I took the GMAT in 2010 (to apply to Master's programs), and let's just say it had been a few years since my high school days at that point! None of my undergraduate business courses really focused on most of the math topics tested on the GMAT. (I have since refreshed myself on these topics, in preparation for a phd, but at the time I had to really scrape my memory for any recollection of these topics). There are others who did much better than me on the GMAT, and several good forums out there to get GMAT advice but I'll tell you my preparation story. I prepared for the GMAT using Kaplan's book and software, and a book full of official GMAT questions. Total investment was under $100. I suggest you go through as many questions as possible--I would spend a few hours on the software and then sit down with a piece of paper and the book and start on those questions. Strategy is important to learn, but there's a sharp inflection point of diminishing returns. You only need to pass a certain threshold of strategic advice, and beyond that it's wasted time because it's time you are not practicing questions. Even though math required the most refreshing (it had been years), I actually gained the most overall points from where I started by increasing my verbal score. Because the GMAT is such an international test nowadays, many non-native English speakers take it. As such, gaining a point on the verbal section sometimes increases the overall score more than gaining a point on the math section, where international students are much more at parity (or--dare I say?--better). Also, I think that data sufficiency is something no "normal" class prepares you for. In my academic history, anyway, it stands as entirely unique to the GMAT. So, be sure to spend a good amount of time on that, because your instincts may be relatively worthless on those questions, compared to more typical math questions. Good Luck!

I was actually just thinking about this. What happened here seems backwards; it just makes me sick to my stomach. People who are more lurking than sharing (like me, admittedly) reap the benefit of observing the open conversation on this forum, which helps one gain insight into what certain programs are looking for--a powerful advantage when applying. Lurkers are furthermore shielded from any bad actors getting themselves involved in a detrimental way in the admissions process. Those who share and participate more transparently, however, are opened up to potential mischief--of whatever motivation. I don't think that's very fair, and I'm sorry to be on the more advantaged side of that equation. I just feel very sorry for this happening to HQ and cannot imagine the horror if it had happened to me. In my case, I know that I am perfectly capable of producing my own faux pas's, thank you very much. I don't need anyone else's over-eagerness to further complicate the naturally knife-edge balancing act of phd admissions. Whoever did this should just remember that even having a forum like this is a privilege brought to you by mutual trust and cooperation. Trust can be broken very quickly if the people within a society do not act morally, ethically, virtuously, and otherwise correctly. This is an incredibly appropriate lesson for the future, as almost all of the academy's activities are predicated upon collegiality and cooperation. This action bodes very badly for whoever did it, and for their future in doctoral studies. It's just a terrible habit to be in when one is pursuing this line of work, and it's a habit that needs to be changed or it will bite you back hard some day. I can think of times when I have had confidence broken in the past (as I'm sure most of us can), and from my experience I say that the sooner you purge the bitterness from your heart the better--with or without the other person's contrition. Forgiveness is the only way to rise above, and to flourish in spite of offense. I agree that reconciliation should be mostly or entirely private. I would hope if anyone held a grudge for something I did or for some my dumb comments I made that they would address it to me directly--so I can apologize and let them know that I'm just un idiota and not to take me seriously. If I remember correctly HQ has already reached out, so, I'm not saying this to chide HQ. Not in the least. One thought about how to possibly prevent this in the future: I'm not certain that the Econ Forum-style threads--in which you detail your acceptances and rejections, etc.--are a good match for this forum. The applicant pool is proving to be small enough that it is relatively easy to make out someone's RL identity. Econ applicant pools are larger and so their openness carries little downside, and a lot less risk of being made. I don't know; that's just my initial thought...maybe I'm overreacting.

When I first tried to research this on my own, this is the tentative conclusion I came to as well. Most schools that talked about the mathematical preparations for an Accounting PhD did not mention differential equations.

It sure does help. Thanks for sharing your experience. My stats course was pretty good, I felt. The guy who taught it was an economist who basically started the course saying "I'm going to teach you as if you were going on to do economics research, or other social science research. For those of you who don't want to do research and are only in this class because it's required for your major: too bad." That said, it was still only one class an it included a lot of probability, so there were time constraints. We got into regression toward the end of the year and there was a lecture on multiple regression, but it was the last class period and that material was not included on the final. Chi-squared tests were covered (although I could use a refresher) and ANOVA was not touched at all. I have been toying with the idea of a self-study refresher or MIT Open Courseware approach for re-learning the material and getting more exposure to regression. Now that you mention it, I will also look at options to learn ANOVA and to refresh my understanding of chi-squared tests. I'm assuming that any extra math classes I sign up for now will have minimal effect on my admission (applications already sent). That's why I'm tempted to believe self-study is a viable option - I don't need the credit; I just need the knowledge.

Bump. Thanks to all those who have answered so far. I appreciate the vote of confidence, 4getmenot. One related question I have is whether student loans are even an option for PhD students. Non-school-certified student loans look to be a thing of the past (with the retirement of the Wells Fargo Connection loan), so the school-determined Cost of Attendance calculation is crucial. If in that calculation both the tuition waiver and stipend are considered "aid", it doesn't seem like there'd be much, if any, room to borrow money. Is this correct? Or is one of these two not typically considered "aid"?

Quick question... I am registering for math classes for Spring 2013, which will help me prepare for a PhD in Accounting program in Fall 2013. Two classes are available: "Linear Algebra" and "Elementary Differential Equations and Linear Algebra". I have a pretty tight schedule, so I am left to consider the cost and benefit of the additional "Elementary Differential Equation" material. How helpful is that additional material for a PhD in Accounting? I hope to pursue the experimental/behavioral research track, if that makes a difference.

This waiting game is killing me! I finished up apps mid-November and have been stir-crazy ever since. You inspired me. The other day I searched thegradcafe.com for the schools I applied to and created a spreadsheet with the average dates for Accepts, Rejects, Interviews, and Waitlists. If it's accurate, the timeline is February 6th interview notification, February 29th acceptance, March 9th waitlisting notification, March 20th rejection. ...hopefully, that's not all from the same school.

Thanks for all those who've responded. Anyone else reading, feel free to share whatever thoughts you have related to these questions. @Forgetmenot - I sure do hope my profile is enough to get a good admission. I wake up every day worrying that it isn't. This waiting game is one of the more difficult games I've ever played, and the least fun... My list has changed from what I posted back in June (and grown to include 15 univerisities -- all applications done, woohoo!). This is thanks in part to the great suggestions from this forum. 20k is also what I am tentatively considering the conservative figure for stipend. I will need to be able to support a family on my funding. I have confidence that it can be done (and that we can adjust our living expenses -- we were on a student budget once before, we can do it again!). Yet, I am generally a risk-averse person, and I want to know what flexibility I have as far as increasing income or getting additional funding if need be (I know that big expenses can and do hit you sometimes). @all - One of my biggest question marks is about student loans. I am trying to see how taking out student loans as a PhD is even possible. This in unfortunately an area that I have some...familiarity...with, so I'm trying to ask very specific questions. I question the existence of PhD student loans because (1) there are no more non-school-certified student loans, as far as I can tell. The last of the bunch was the Wells Fargo Connecion loan which was discontinued in the 2010-2011 time frame. So, (2) PhD student loans (government-related or private) will therefore be school certified, meaning they are capped by school-determined cost of attendance, and only allowed in the amount of cost of attendance not covered by other forms of "aid". (3) I am very curious to see how tuition waiver and stipend affect this. If both are considered "aid", then I can hardly see any remainder in the cost of attendance to be loaned against. For example: I have never seen a cost of attendance at more than 20k above the cost of tuition. So if tuition is 30k, then cost of attendance has (based on my experience) a max of 50k. If the 30k in tuition waiver is considered "aid", then only 20k would remain as loanable cost of attendance. The conservative estimate for RA/TA stipend is 20k also, meaning that if the stipend is also considered "aid" there would zero dollars to loan against. This is definitely a question I will ask the financial aid office of any school I get accepted to (I'm crossing fingers). In the meantime, I hope to gather information on what is the norm. ADDITIONAL NOTE: I am aware that I may not be calling these things by their correct name. As I investigate universities I have applied to, it seems each of them has differenent terms for all of this (teaching fellows, resaerch assistants, summer teaching instructorship, fellowships for RA/TA activities, stipends, and whatnot). I'm not he most knowledgeable about the meanings nad disticntions between these terms. I apologize if my questions in the OP are at all confusing. Feel free to ask me if there's any doubt as to what I mean and please correct me if I am mistaken in my usage of them of my understanding of how they work.

Wow, now I'm "another quintessential PhD fool"...and I'm not yet even admitted to a PhD program! I'm honored by the preemptive hooding -- what a terrific black swan! (Actually, I think that your debate style and arguments fit into Taleb's framework as fragile (i.e. with more disorder, they get weaker, not stronger), because you have not been able to defend your arguments against opposing arguments without resorting to trolling and name-calling. On the other hand, I would say that my argument (that you are showing bad form at best and are trolling at worst) is antifragile. The more you fight against it, the stronger my argument gets.)

No thanks. My time is a scarce commodity. You're going to have to market your posts better than you have to get me to expend my time reading them. And besides, what does your response to rsaylors have to do with your -- dare I say it? -- troll-like behavior towards TheAmazingSteve? The potential merits (or the potential lack of merits) of your argument do not dictate the manner in which you choose to deliver it.