Category Archives: 2nd doctoral exam

My Beach Cruiser and Boomer’s Houndabout Bike Share

As promised a few weeks ago, here is the fun reward I got myself for completing the second qualifying exam! It’s a Nirve Beach Cruiser I found at PedalUniverse and I finally hooked up Boomer’s HoundAbout.

photo-25

Last year I tried to hook up the HoundAbout to my old bike but I was unable to do so. I felt like a failure, especially after reading reviews like this “It was so easy to hook up…”. So I asked the old Manfrankager to give it a try – and he couldn’t do it either, and that made me feel better.

What I realized, thanks to the guys at Metro Bicycles, was the HoundAbout can only hook up to bikes that have less than 7 gears and are not quick release.

photo-24
Old bike with too many gears and quick release wheels

Enter the Nirve Cruiser – which has 3 gears and is not quick release.

Happy ending:

nirve cruiser with houndabout
Nirve Cruiser with HoundAbout outside Metro Bicycle Shop
Stay tuned for some Boomer action shots!

 

 

3 Points of Contention with Paul J. Silvia’s Book ‘How to Write a Lot’

As you will know if you check out my previous post I think Paul J. Silvia’s book ‘How to Write a Lot’ is an excellent resource. However, there are at least three points (perhaps minor) on which Silvia and I disagree.

1. Making and sticking to writing times is very important. That said, I think that graduate students need to be flexible. I schedule meetings with professors around my writing time when I can, but if a professor only has a certain slot available I think it is important to be able to move my writing time to an hour later.

On a related point, in the name of terseness I said in my last post that my writing times were M, W, F from 1-3pm. In truth, I had to accommodate my teaching schedule. On Mondays I taught at Hunter College from 10:10 – 1pm. After class I needed to get food, and then there was not really a good place for me to work at Hunter – so I commuted home, and then I usually had to walk Boomer. My writing time on Mondays had to be moved to 3-5pm. What is most important, and Silvia stresses this, is that the writing time is a consistent time that you can work well and focus on your research.

Two of these next points concern the physical surroundings that Silvia maintains are necessary for writing.

2. Silvia makes light of working in his living room, bedroom, guest bedroom and “briefly in a bathroom” (p. 21). He then concedes that he wrote ‘How to Write a Lot” in the guest bedroom in his house. I agree with Silvia’s larger point – you don’t need a home office to write a lot; but I think that a guest bedroom is a nice luxury not afforded to many grad students, especially those of us in NYC. I would amend Sivlia’s point. You don’t need a home office, but it is useful to have a place where you consistently write. For example, I write at my kitchen table. I stack up a bunch of Developmental Psychology issues so the laptop is eye level, and I don’t strain my neck (yes it’s happened), and then I plug in a USB mouse and keyboard. I call this space my ‘office’, and when my writing time is up – I put my office away (Or my wife gently reminds me to do so when she gets home). I think having this regular space is important, it adds to my routine and cuts out the ten or more minutes I might waste trying to settle down elsewhere. Of course some days I am at school – so I just use the desktops there and that works fine too.

3. Finally, Silvia claims you do not need a comfortable chair. I disagree. You don’t need to spend thousands of dollars on a chair, but your chair should be comfortable and supportive. Silvia says he worked on a metal folding chair and an Eames fiberglass chair. Perhaps that worked for him but I could not sit on one of those chairs for 6- 10 hours a week. As Chuck Close says, “How’s the back?”.

 Eames Chair similar to Paul J. Silvia's in 'How to Write a Lot'
A Lonely Eames Chair at the Graduate Center (CUNY)

I Passed My Second Qualifying Exam; Thanks Paul J. Silvia!

repost from google book review:

A couple weeks ago I passed my second qualifying exam, also known as the second doctoral exam. In my Ph.D. program, these consist of a 20 page literature review presenting an in depth critique of at least 10 research articles. Aside from the support of my advisor, Colette Daiute, and my second reader, Joe Glick, the most important person in this process was someone I have never met, Paul J. Silvia author of How to Write a Lot.

Three critical recommendations from Silvia were as follows:

Make a writing schedule and stick to it.

For me the schedule was M, W, Fri from 1-3pm. Silvia says his schedule is M – Fri 8-10am. I called this time my ‘meeting time’ and reserved it for writing and reading related literature. Silvia suggests turning off your phone and even the Internet (gasp!) during this time. Furthermore, plan appointments and extracurricular activities around this time, as you would if you were actually meeting someone.

Write out specific goals.

For example, early on my goal for one writing time would be to read an article and write a rough draft of a critique. Later in the process the goal for a writing time might have been to revise the method section.

Reward yourself!

This was my favorite piece of advice from Silvia. For my reward on completing the exam I bought a fun used bike (check out my next post for details!).

How to Write a Lot is about 150 pages, but I think I gleaned the most valuable information after about the first 50. I still refer back to this book even though I’m done with the exam and there’s likely more great insights to gain.

I think many academics and certainly anyone working on the qualifying exams would be wise to read Silvia’s book. Even if you don’t read it – at least take these three pieces of advice: Make a writing schedule, write specific goals each week, and reward yourself!

Finally, thanks to my fellow ITP’ers Ashley and Michelle who recommended this resource!

how to write a lot
How to Write a Lot
By Paul J. Silvia

Life in Academia, Open Access Psychology Journals and Indices

repost from ITP Core II:

“Publish or perish” is a popular maxim in academia. Recently, in a well publicized case (where I posted a similar comment), the fight for open access truly was a life or death battle.

In less dramatic circumstances I too have grappled with the implications of access to information. While writing my second qualifying exam and sketching my dissertation proposal I experienced the stifling impact of the traditional journal system and the importance of open access. Two journals that begin their titles with the word “Cyberpsychology” serve as a case in point for the debate over open access journals.

Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networkingformerly known as Cyberpsychology and Behavior is not open access. Fortunately, people at the Graduate Center (CUNY), and likely at other institutions, can access this journals publications from 2000 to one year ago through library databases. I cited one article from this journal (Ko & Kuo, 2009) in a paper for my second qualifying exam. However, I cannot view articles published in the past year. This is somewhat frustrating because I would like to review the most recent articles as I conduct my literature review for my fast approaching dissertation proposal.

In comparison I cited three articles from Cyberpsychology, an open access journal, and one of these articles was published in the last year (Bane, Cornish, Erspamer, & Kampman, 2012). The current system for dissemination of scientific journals could clearly be improved. Much scientific research is federally funded, shouldn’t the public be able to read the reports they helped support?

My experience may be indicative of a larger trend. If academics cite open access journals more – these journals may gain greater influence and perhaps this will pressure more journals to transition to the open-access model.

On a related note I found these two indexes of open access journals:

DOAJ

Bentham Science

Baker, J. R. & Moore, S. (2008a). Distress, coping, and blogging: Comparing new  Myspace users by their intention to blog. Cyberpsychology 11(1), 81-85.

Baker, J. R. & Moore, S. (2008b). Distress, coping, and blogging: Comparing new  Myspace users by their intention to blog. Cyberpsychology 11(6), 747-749.

Bane, C. M., Cornish, M., Erspamer, N., & Kampman, L. (2012). Self-disclosure through weblogs and perceptions of online and ‘real-life’ friendships among female  bloggers.Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking, 13, 131-9.

Ko, H. C., & Kuo, F. Y. (2009). Can blogging enhance subjective well-being through self   disclosure? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 12: 75-9.