Senior undergrad Mechanical Engineering student at a smallish uni, taking distance classes from a much bigger school in our uni system. I'll acknowledge that I'm asking this out of frustration with how my TSAD class is graded.

One of the big curfuffels students face in college is inconsistent grading systems between classes. 2 classes can require fundamentally the same work, with said work given the same effort by the same student, but one grade could be lower than the other entirely based on the different professors' idea of partial credit, for example. I was wondering, what would happen if, before every semester, all the professors of a department had to get together and agree on the same grading scale/system across all of the classes they teach in their program?

There's a ton of issues with this idea, of course, which is why I've never heard of any uni doing this. Differing personalities and different requirements for classes throughout the program are obvious things to point out (tho what I'm thinking of would exclude classes outside the major program that are still required for credit. The comp professors wouldn't have to meet and agree on the grading scale with the engineering or film professors, that'd be beyond stupid to suggest).

I feel like, even in an ideal scenario where all the classes in the program are similar in work and effort enough to be compatible across a uniform grading system, there's something inherently wrong with this idea that prevents it from having been seriously considered.

What am I missing here? Has there been an attempt at this idea in higher education?

I have a professor who's same age as me, I am 29. i am about to graduate in a couple of weeks. I am not going to try ask her out now for obvious reasons, but was wondering, if I graduate, is it cool to try and ask her out. right now we don't have any connection besides student/teacher, although she is about 3 months younger than me. what do you think

Quick disclaimer: English isn't my first language, and I wrote the original post myself. Some people were having a hard time catching what my actual questions were, so I used GPT to help organize the post and improve the flow. The experiences, concerns, and questions are mine; I just used it as an editing tool to make the post easier to follow. I am not jealous of anyone and I don't have narcissism. I am looking for suggestions and advice. I would be grateful. This is the only place and the last place i can ask ( 3min reading )

I’m a first-semester MSc student in a non-CS engineering program at a US Top 40 university, and I started my master's in fall 26. I’m independently funded through a scholarship rather than directly funded by my PI, although my PI specifically selected me to join his lab, and I worked with him during my application phase, and that work was submitted to a Q1 journal recently.

I ultimately want to become a professor, ideally at a highly ranked research university. A big part of that goal is personal: I come from a family and background with no education. My parents and relatives are illiterate, and Most of my relatives are unable to read this English post, let alone understand it.

I want to prove that someone without academic mentors, with such an illiterate family background, or an established research network can still reach the top of academia even in 2026.

Because of that, I care quite a lot about PhD placement, research productivity, and university/lab reputation.

My background

I completed my bachelors from a prestigious regional university in my continent last year. However, my undergraduate institution has a relatively weak research culture because of limited funding and broader socioeconomic conditions. It is more theory-oriented than research-oriented, so I didn't graduate with a network of professors or established research collaborations. For example, in the last 2 years, no students of my BSc major have published in Q2, let alone Q1. Some published in Q3 and in conferences.

Despite that, I worked hard independently and learned by myself. For example , i learned the difference between first author and corresponding author last week. i thought both are supposed to be same person.

I currently have a Q2 journal paper under review where I am both first author and corresponding author, as well as a conference paper, both co-authored with my BSc supervisor. I am in my 2nd month of my master's at this university.

I have also recently submitted a Q1 paper as first author with my current master's supervisor.

My current PI assigned me a co-supervisor from another top university as well. I realize that this may be something he does for many students, so I don't want to overinterpret it.

My Master research is also quite different from my BSc coursework. I learned much of the relevant material independently and was able to contribute to research in a field I had not formally studied before.

In general, I'm fairly multidisciplinary. I enjoy learning across STEM fields and seem to adapt relatively quickly when I encounter a new area.

I have also had multiple PhD offers in the US in different majors, including a Boston University PhD, although I ultimately chose this MSc instead (I will explain the reason below).

My long-term goal

I want to pursue a PhD at a very strong research university. I have a particular MIT lab in mind because its research is a good fit for my interests.

I understand that QS ranking itself is not the most important factor for PhD admissions. Advisor reputation, research fit, publications, recommendation letters, research potential, and academic networks can matter much more.

My labmate's situation

My Chinese labmate entered the Master's program at the same time as me. We are the same age, and both completed our bachelor's degrees at the same time.

However, his research situation is very different. He is from one of the richest families in china.

He has already published multiple Q1 papers as first author this year, based partly on work he had already done during last 2 years before entering our MSc. He is actively submitting more.

The key difference is that these papers are part of a large, existing collaboration network involving our current PI, his former BSc supervisor, and several other highly connected Chinese professors, including associate editors of major journals. He had an entire research network with him from undergraduate studies. However, his bachelor's supervisor was our PI's PhD senior, and both are Chinese.

He also already has PhD offers through our current lab/PI.

Both of us are interested in the same MIT lab, and our current PI has academic connections there. Because my labmate already has a strong publication record and an established relationship with this network, I worry that he will be prioritised for introductions or recommendations.

I also understand that this is not necessarily anyone's fault. He worked hard and built those relationships.

My frustration is more about comparing my individual effort with an established research pipeline.

Why this bothers me

My biggest question is:

If he can be this productive, why can't I?

Why can't I have a safety net ( i mean he already have phd offer from our pi in case he fails to admit in MIT, its just 2 months of masters) like him? Just because I am not Chinese? I know that comparing myself to someone with a completely different research infrastructure is probably unfair. But it is difficult not to feel like I am falling behind.

He has multiple first-author Q1 papers in this single year, and all of his co-authors are chinese professors. One professor is directly contributed for whole methodology part. i don't know even that case he is the 1st author. I don't know how much professors helped him in that research. What I know, my BSc university did not have those research lab facilities, let alone the ability to do this type of research.

I have had to build almost everything from scratch. i told you about the environment grew up.

Another difference is that I haven't historically used AI tools such as GPT for research, whereas he apparently does. His current h-index is around 5, while his i10-index is already in the double digits.

So objectively, I know there are major differences in our circumstances.

Emotionally, however, I still feel like a loser when I compare our research outputs.

The lab environment: friendly, but somewhat isolated

The interesting thing is that my lab itself is actually very friendly.

There is no obvious toxicity or mistreatment. Nobody behaves badly toward me. My PI is kind and supportive, and he has apparently praised my work ethics highly to other lab members when I wasn't present. Although I believe other Chinese members are more connected. I will explain later, with proof in this post below.

Because my research topic is not directly connected to his funded projects, he went out of his way to arrange a co-supervisor from another university for me. Although I believe that he does this for everyone.

So I don't want to portray my PI as a bad person. I don't think he is. He tells me that i am research mature student. That does not mean i will be left alone in the wild while he handfeed his masters student of his nationality just because that student is already supervised by his phd lab senior.

However, there are some things that make me feel somewhat isolated.

For example, I recently discovered that there is a lab WeChat group that I was never told about.

I communicate with my PI individually, so I don't know whether the group is mainly for his directly funded students, whether it is primarily a Chinese-language group, or whether I was simply overlooked. I am not included in lab food event plans (probably due to my food restrictions)

I also currently have no co-authorship opportunities within the lab.

My PI recently told me that I should aim for one Q1 paper during my MSc, and that this would be enough, particularly if it comes from the topic he assigned me.

I actually find the topic interesting, so I don't object to working on it.

But personally, I want to aim higher because I want to be competitive for a top PhD program.

The PhD concern

This is where I am most uncertain.

My labmate and I are both interested in the same MIT lab.

He has already told our PI that he intends to apply there, and he has potential PhD opportunities through our current PI. Infact prof said," you can just join my lab or my supervisers lab if you can't got into MIT."

I don't have that kind of established pathway. I have no such offers from my prof. Probably thats because of my language and nationality.[ i can not speak chinese ]

When I told my PI that I ultimately wanted to pursue a PhD at a highly ranked university, he basically told me not to worry about PhD applications yet and to enjoy my master's.

I understand that he may simply be trying to prevent me from stressing unnecessarily during my first semester.

However**, I rejected a PhD offer from Boston University to do this MSc( my pi knows about this), partly because I believed the MSc would give me stronger research opportunities for my long-term goals. Don't get me wrong, i check lab topics too. For example I love my current lab topics and can work on this topic whole day. [ Sad part is, i will still behind of many people or would not get a safety net,]**

So naturally, I am anxious about whether I am actually building the right profile.

We will apply for PhDs in 2027 for 2028 entry, so I still have time. But I don't want to waste that time.

What I am trying to understand

I genuinely don't know how to interpret this situation.

Am I experiencing subtle academic exclusion because I am an international, independently funded student(not by prof.) who isn't part of the existing network?

Or am I simply seeing the normal advantage that comes from having an established research network?

I don't want to accuse anyone of discrimination without evidence. At the same time, I don't want to be naïve about how academic networks work.

My questions

1. Am I experiencing subtle academic exclusion, or am I mainly seeing the enormous advantage of pre-existing institutional/research networks?
2. How can an independently funded student realistically increase research output when they don't have an established network of professors feeding them projects and collaborations?
3. How should I approach my PI? Would it be reasonable to ask whether I can join the lab's WeChat group, perhaps using translation tools if necessary?
4. Should I explicitly tell my PI that I want to aim for more than one Q1 paper during my MSc? Or would that come across as unrealistic or ungrateful?
5. How important are these internal lab networks for getting strong PhD recommendation letters? If my labmate has much closer connections with the existing network, should I be worried about being disadvantaged?
6. What should I actually prioritize during the next year if my goal is a top PhD program? More papers? A stronger single paper? Independent research? Collaborations? Building relationships with professors outside my current lab?

I would especially appreciate advice from current PhD students, professors, or people who have gone through the process without coming from a strong academic family or institutional network. It would be great if Chinese prof. or students can explain. I am trying to understand Chinese culture.

One final personal note

I hate admitting how much this bothers me.

Sometimes I feel that birthplace, ethnicity, family background, and access to academic networks determine how difficult the path to a top PhD becomes.

I don't think my labmate is doing anything wrong, and I am genuinely happy for anyone who succeeds.

But I also come from a background where there were no professors, researchers, or academics around me to tell me how academia works. I had to figure out almost everything myself. No relatives or non-academic friends can really advise me about research careers. Even my parents cannot read or understand most of the academic English I use.

So when I see someone my age already surrounded by professors, research collaborations, publications, and PhD opportunities, I sometimes wonder whether I am simply not good enough.

At the same time, I know objectively that I have already come much further than anyone in my family could have imagined.

I just don't know how to make the next jump.

How do people from backgrounds like mine realistically become competitive for the very top research universities? How can i secure MIT phd ? How can i get a safety net?

I don't want sympathy. I want to understand what I should actually do differently

I am a teacher who is getting my specialist. I went with an expensive school because I went there for my masters and the professors were honestly great. I feel like it actually taught me instead of just being a pay bump. In my overarching research course there are two instructors. The main one who is a doctor and actually has a degree in education, and some adjunct science professor with a 2/5 on every rating site there is. She is not listed with a faculty email so it is my understanding she's supposed to be working under him, but she just took the secondary students while he took the elementary. She is obviously grading our work with AI. She references previous feedback that either never happened or was dropped on the same day. It's got the headings and the "a, b, and even c" type ai-isms. I gave her the benefit of the doubt at first but whenever I ask about feedback not making sense I'm given condescending responses about how the feedback makes perfect sense if I just read all 7 documents and 14 unpunctuated sentences in a row she dropped into the discussion post she makes every assignment into(it doesn't).

Example: we did statistical analysis practice in which we were told to make up numbers. I did. The feedback said my data entry didn't match the answer key. The first time I asked without quoting she said that "answer key" means "rubric" or "scoring guide". I sent the quotes that said my data points themselves did not match the answer key. She then said that what it meant was that I did not choose the correct test, in spite of her original feedback saying I correctly used a paired t test.

My question: is it unreasonable to ask to be transferred to the other instructor? This class alone is 10 grand for a fully virtual course and I'm not wasting money to get failed out of my program. I understand this is grad school and not k-12 where Mommy can yell at them, but for an expensive and well regarded institution this just seems outrageous.

I’m currently a sophomore at a liberal arts college, and I’m interested in becoming a clinical psychologist. I want to get some psychology research experience to figure out whether research is something I enjoy.
I applied for a research opportunity at my college over the summer but was rejected. I think part of the reason may be that I didn’t reach out to professors beforehand, even though that’s highly recommended. I’m hoping to get involved next semester, even if it’s just as a volunteer research assistant, and ideally find an on-campus research opportunity for the summer as well.
I’m a little anxious about my chances because my GPA is currently 3.514, while the average GPA for my graduating class was around 3.65. I attend a rigorous school and have always done mostly well academically, but I struggled with prioritization last year. I’ve been working hard to improve my grades this year and feel like I’m doing much better.
Do you think it’s still realistic for me to get involved in psychology research with my GPA? And what steps would you recommend I take this semester to increase my chances of getting a research position, especially for the summer? I’m also an international student, so I can only work on campus.
Sorry for the long post!

Hi all. A few days ago I was looking into a personal question regarding literature critique that had caused me headache for some time now, and stumbled on a (relatively) short paper written by a literature professor around 10 years ago which is remarkably thoughtful, well-cited, and well-organized. It answered my original question alongside several far more interesting questions I hadn’t even considered, and overall I feel the paper has thoroughly improved my ability to meaningfully engage with and critique literature.

This professor hasn’t published any new papers in the last 8 years or so, and seems to have moved away from research and towards teaching undergraduate courses. Would it be awkward for me, an undergrad in a different country, to email him with a brief “thank you” note for his work? I imagine he’s got plenty of emails from his students and colleagues already, and I’m not too sure how much he’d enjoy receiving random fanmail from someone he doesn’t know.

Would you find it weird to receive a note like that?