Applicant from PhD program after 5 Nov, 2011 connect here to get status

[zorroo]

"points are awarded to an applicant for experience gained in the 10 years preceding the date of the application"...this is correct meaning if you appled in july 2013, you can claim work experience gained from July 2003 to july 2013....
it is also true that CIC has to take into account "any years of experience that occur between application and assessment" meaning say eventhough you applied in July 2013, your file was not asssessed until July 2014, then technically you can update/add work experience gained within this 1 year (july 2013 to july 2014) while your file was in processing...
regarding your second question, you have to find the best NOC code that corresponds with the work you are claiming...mind you, for each NOC code they have a list of job titles accepted under that NOC for example for NOC 4012 you can use any of the following
college laboratory assistant
college teaching assistant
demonstrator, laboratory – post-secondary teaching assistance
discussion group leader – post-secondary teaching assistant
graduate assistant – university
laboratory assistant, college
laboratory assistant, university
laboratory demonstrator – post-secondary teaching assistance
laboratory supervisor – post-secondary teaching assistant
marker – post-secondary teaching assistance
post-secondary research assistant
post-secondary teaching assistant
research assistant – post-secondary
research assistant, university
teaching assistant – post-secondary
teaching assistant – university
teaching assistant, college
teaching assistant, university
tutor – post-secondary teaching assistant
university laboratory assistant
university research assistant
university teaching assistant

Most of us have used RA-university /TA-uiversity for this NOC...similarly, you have to look at the NOC codes corresponding to your area (i'm not familiar with engineering NOC codes, so i can't really comment more on this!)

Now another key thing is when you chose an NOC code/NOC title make sure you have done atleast 75-100% of the duties mentioned in that category...the more the better....we can never say what they mean by substantuial number of job duties, but if there are 10 duties listed and you performed 7 or 8 of these , i'll say you are safe!..and i know that it's hard to have done exactly the duties CIC wants...but then you have no way out...it s CICs guidelines for assessing work experience

Thanks for your comments. But as I mentioned a friend of mine got rejected and they did not account his work experience that occur between application and assessment by that stupid reason of "experience gained in the 10 years preceding the date of the application would be account"!. Anyone else has any comment about NOCs for engineering and how it is possible to simultaneously fulfill all the main duties and lead statement?

 

[kg.jadu]

Guys, asbereth, anjuku, aililia, and salem10,

I think all of you are right. There is no doubt that TA/RA experience is an absolutely valid work experience and it counts for immigration. So many people got PR based just on the RA/TA, and so many to follow. As we all saw, most of the people were rejected for the specific reason---mismatch of the duties performed in the letter of reference and the NOC descriptions, and/or missing lead statement, however ridiculously small, the mismatch sometimes might seem. I am absolutely positive that somebody who would apply through other streams where work experience is required, would also be rejected, had s/he had an incomplete (from the point of view of the officer) letter of reference. In fact, a friend of mine with an absolutely "legit" job title got rejected just recently in the CEC stream. Reason being, she did not spell out the lead statement well enough. Had she asked me earlier, I would have definitely helped her write the letter.

What I referred to in my old post on RA/GRA, is that the two experiences are different from the point of view of immigration officers. GRA seems to be some sort of a "classical" case, where the research you do just gets you a degree. This, for example, frequently happens in social sciences/humanities, where people do their own thing, and the role of adviser is just to discuss the research and judge the results (some of my friends in the literature don't even write papers, only thesis). Think for a moment, if the letter of reference said that "Mr. XXX was performing the research on YYY towards his/her PhD", would the application of that person be accepted? Chances are, it would be rejected precisely because "Mr. XXX did not demonstrate the evidence assisting the faculty member". But more often than not, the reality is different, especially in the science/engineering fields. As asbereth pointed out, our research is not used just for completing the degree, most of our papers are published in co-authorship with a graduate adviser, and become Professor's asset, too. Also, some of us prepare papers that don't go into thesis but are a part of the same graduate research. What is it, if not a valid Research Assistantship?

The boundary between RA and GRA is really thin, and I think it is not even productive to draw one. Truth is, the immigration officers could not care less about what we think or believe. They have a book (OP 6), and they go by it. And we have to make their work easier by writing what they expect---tell the story of our work, and at the same time, do not misrepresent ourselves.

So let's stop arguing and have a constructive discussion on how to help each other to make the road to PR easier.

Peace,

-kg.jadu

 

[anjuku]

Thanks for your comments. But as I mentioned a friend of mine got rejected and they did not account his work experience that occur between application and assessment by that stupid reason of "experience gained in the 10 years preceding the date of the application would be account"!. Anyone else has any comment about NOCs for engineering and how it is possible to simultaneously fulfill all the main duties and lead statement?

I don't think the visa officer is at blame in your friends case...because it explicitly states you have to show atleast 1 year of continuous work experience in the 10years preceeding your application date...so at the time your friend applied say july 2013 he MUST have met that requirement..whatever you gain after july 2013 is extra work experience uptil the date of assessment..the date of assessment can be 1 month or 8 months from July 2013 or even 1year or 2 years from July 2013...that really shouldn't matter because if your friend was rejected based on the reason you mentioned, it means the VO was not convinced with the work your friend claimed with his initial application too...that means your friend's case was not strong to begin with..

 

[kg.jadu]

By the way, for the long time I had an idea of creating some sort of shared online document, in which we could share successful letters of reference for the new applicants to consult. Something similar to the tracker. I would add the link to the document to my signature, as many people did with the tracker.

Motivation: Old letters of reference get lost in the thread, and it is difficult to search for them for new forum members.

I wish this sort of document existed when I was applying, it would have saved me so much time and frustration. I tried using the Google Docs but I can see that the document is not completely anonymous. Could anybody (maybe people who manage the tracker) contact me and help me set up the document? I will share my successful letter of reference (approved by FA01772) here and post it to the shared document, when we have one:

(date)

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is to verify the employment of Mr. XXX in the (department) at the (university) from (date) to (date).

From (date) to (date), Mr. XXX was employed by the university as a Graduate Teaching Assistant for (#) hours.
From (date) to (date), he was employed in the same capacity for (#) hours per annum. The total work experience
as a Teaching Assistant accumulated by Mr. XXX is approximately 840 hours.

Mr. XXX was also employed by the university as a Graduate Research Assistant of Professor YYY from (date)
to (date) for (#) hours per week and from (date) to (date) for (#) hours per week. The total work experience as a
Research Assistant accumulated by Mr. XXX is therefore not less than 3,500 hours.

As a Teaching Assistant, Mr. XXX assisted Professors AAA and BBB in teaching undergraduate courses (course)
((dates)), (course) ((dates)), and (course) ((dates)). The main duties of Mr. XXX as a Teaching Assistant were as follows:

• Conduct laboratory sessions for the courses (courses)
• Conduct seminars and tutorial sessions for the course (course)
• Grade tutorials, quizzes and laboratory reports in the courses (courses)
• Assist in administering examinations in undergraduate (subject) courses

As a Research Assistant, Mr. XXX assisted Professor YYY in research activities in (discipline). The duties of
Mr. XXX as a Research Assistant included the following:

• Plan and conduct scientific research in (field)
• Prepare literature reviews, compile and analyse results of experiments
• Assist Professor YYY in preparing and publishing articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals
• Present research seminars and supervise undergraduate researchers

Mr. XXX received approximately $20,500 per annum for his teaching assisting duties and research activities.

If you require any further information, please contact me at (phone) or (email).

Sincerely,



ZZZ
Graduate Program Coordinator

For the reference, this letter was printed on the departmental letterhead and signed by the graduate coordinator. (No signature of Professor or the chair.)

Good luck to everyone.

-kg.jadu

 

[kg.jadu]

Hi guys,

I received my GCMS notes on Friday---and they were actually extremely useful for understanding what was going on with my file and how immigration officers work. Now I want to share my story with you.

As you may know, I was rejected on March 29, 2012 because I relied on adaptability points for previous PhD studies. When I wrote to CIO pointing out the specific paragraphs of the IRPA and OP6, they put my application back into processing. What my GCMS notes say, is that the decision has not been reverted, it has been transferred to the visa officer (in CPP-Ottawa). In other words, there is no duality in how CIO and CPP-Ottawa personnel treats the adaptability points---CIO officer who processed my file simply "washed his/her hands" and delegated the decision to somebody else. But thanks to that, I was able to finish my PhD in the meantime and get both adaptability points and the points for the doctoral degree.

On April 26, the CPP-Ottawa (RK6165) requested the POF from me and placed my file for the review by FA01772 with the due date on May 26. RK6165 also initiated my criminality check. 3 days later, my file was looked at by another officer (SL01732) who did preliminary evaluation. His/her recommendation was to reject my application:

Needless to say, my duties were very carefully crafted (me and my adviser spent hours polishing the letter) but the leading statements were missing---simply because "As a Research Assistant, Mr. Kg.Jadu was assisting Prof. AAA in the research in solid-state physics" sounded kind of silly to us. (WRONG---immigration officers don't think so.) Luckily for me, on April 30, RK6165 attached to my file an updated letter of reference for my RA/TA. (Asbereth knows that I prepared it in April in response to the many rejections we saw on this forum, but for some reason the letter was not attached to my file, so I had to send it once again on April 30.) Then, on May 24, the file was reviewed again (I assume, by FA01772), and I received an email advising that I passed eligibility and was asked to pay the RPRF. The email was from GG06553, not from FA01772. And on May 25, I received a medical request. My assumption is (fingers crossed) that the officer who reviewed my application on May 24 considered the updated letter of reference and did not take into account SL01732's recommendation to reject my application. I ordered new GCMS report immediately after receiving the old one to see what exactly happened to my file. I hope I'm not missing anything at this point because I just did my medical exam and paid $450 in cash, so it would suck to be rejected at this point.

I hope this information will help other applicants. Remember that anything you send to the CPP-Ottawa office will be considered, but you have to make sure your additional information is received before the rejection and is attached to your file. (Because sometimes it doesn't, as aidina and I now know.) Also, I am now convinced that CIO is not a real decision-maker, so never assume if you received PER, it means you're almost there.

P.S. By the way, if you want to study your GCMS notes in detail, it makes sense to start reading them from the end---this is where the officers put their notes. Then proceed backwards and read about all the movement of your file between officers and offices. If you don't want to study the notes in detail, then first 1--5 pages contain the summary of your file and should be enough to get a general idea of where you stand. Though, as I said, I found it extremely useful to invest the time and carefully study my notes.

I meant to share my second set of GCMS notes (I received them in early July) with the forum but was busy lately. Anyways, on May 23, after I sent my updated letter of reference, my file was reviewed by SL01732 once again, this time with the positive recommendation (I obtained 71 points). Next day, FA01772 confirmed my eligibility and sent my file for further processing. I see that everything in the application is done except medical (which was added to my file later) and security. However, FA01772, who updated my security section, deleted the status "Not started", and there is no due date. But in my understanding and after consultations with asbereth, this is completely normal and happens because CIC cannot disclose information on the applicant from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Anyways, no update from CPP-Ottawa since the line "Medical results were received" (around mid-June). Let's see how the things go.

Hope this will motivate others to update their letters of reference ASAP. This really works, folks.

UPD. Another interesting observation. Even though SL01732 considered the leading statement/duties from my updated letter of reference, s/he did not take into account the months of experience gained by me after the application---I was still assigned exactly as much as I had in February 2012 when I applied.

 

[ryan_glory]

has anyone on this forum who recently got their PR travelled to the US with just the landing papers before getting the actual PR card...PR card processing takes 71 days as per CIC website and i believe you can do international travel by car, but not by commercial carriers like bus/aeroplane with just your landing papers/confirmation of permanent residence papers....i just wanted to make sure!..i don't know how many people who got their PRs through this forum are still following this forum..i guess i can always call CIC and confirm but we were planning to leave Monday morning and i don't think i'll get time to call them!...so any input is appreciated ;D

The officer on the border told my gf during landing that she can drive and go to US by the landing paper, but she can not use it for flight to other countries.

 

[anjuku]

The officer on the border told my gf during landing that she can drive and go to US by the landing paper, but she can not use it for flight to other countries.

thank you!!

 

[asbereth]

However, FA01772, who updated my security section, deleted the status "Not started", and there is no due date. But in my understanding and after consultations with asbereth, this is completely normal and happens because CIC cannot disclose information on the applicant from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Anyways, no update from CPP-Ottawa since the line "Medical results were received" (around mid-June). Let's see how the things go.

After FA01772 made their final decision on your selection factor assessment, there should be a note on security, which states that there is no A34/35 or 37 concerns.

I believe that this corresponded to the time my security background check was concluded (having the security value changed from "Not Started" to then blank, and that was the last time anything was being done to security), which was interesting, since my security background check seems to have been concluded before eligibility was even passed (after selection factor, but before assessments of funds)!!!

kg.jadu, your background check seems to have been concluded too then. I forgot, but did you say that criminality has already been concluded as well? Have you provided a valid FBI police certificate (especially since you are now living the States)?

The officer on the border told my gf during landing that she can drive and go to US by the landing paper, but she can not use it for flight to other countries.

Landing paper is enough to re-enter Canada through US land border. PR card is only necessary when you are trying to board a commercial carrier as a Canadian PR. If you don't show them your PR card, the airline won't even let you board the plane, so you would have to either show your PR card, or, if you don't have it, apply for a travel document.

If you return to Canada in a private vehicle, such as your own car, you do not need a permanent resident card. You can use your Record of Landing (IMM 1000) or Confirmation of Permanent Residence (IMM 5292 or IMM 5688) instead.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=64&t=10&expand=b

However, I was told that, if you are visa-exempt to Canada, then you won't even need the PR card to board the plane. Based on what I've been reading so far across the forum, if you can board the plane on your passport alone (say, if you are a citizen of the US or the EU), then you can just show your landing paper to the border agent at the airport, then that should be proof enough of your permanent resident status, after which you can then enter Canada by rights.

 

[dfbb]

here is one of my reference letters.

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is to verify that XXX was employed as a Graduate Teaching Assistant and Research Assistant at the XXXX Department at XXXX University from xxx to xxxx. During this time, he/she assisted professors in teaching and research activities. As a Graduate Teaching Assistant xxxx had many duties and responsibilities such as conducting undergraduate laboratory sessions to supplement lectures, grading laboratory reports and undergraduate papers for various classes, under the supervision of the faculty member who teaches that class. Other duties included, making copies, filing, organizing and setting up study sessions for exams, proctoring exams, and other duties as assigned. As a Graduate Research Assistant, his/her duties included conducting literature reviews, running numerical simulations, compiling research results, and assisting professor to publish the results as journal articles. The working load as a TA/RA is about 20 hours per week. His/her annual salary was about $xxxxx.

 

[tahhiir]

This is strange, they are asking some applicants to pay RPRF and others not.

I just received RPRF request on July 26 and Medical on July 27.

No. I did not.

 

[N_O]

This is strange, they are asking some applicants to pay RPRF and others not.

I just received RPRF request on July 26 and Medical on July 27.

Congrats! I noticed that your timeline wasn't added to the spreadsheet, so I scanned your last posts to get the info, would you please post the missing ones?
I have a question too, if you don't mind! Do you think they accepted your TA/RA that you added later?
Thanks!

 

[dfbb]

my 2nd reference letter:
This statement certifies that xxx was a full-time graduate student in the program of the Department of xxx from xxx to xxx. In addition to full tuition remission, he/she was supported during this time by a series of teaching assistantships, research assistantships, and fellowships. During his/her time here, he/she assisted professors in teaching
and research activities.
Graduate teaching assistants provide support to faculty instructors for undergraduate or
graduate courses. As a teaching assistant, xxx attended lectures, conducted laboratory
sessions, assembled and distributed printed materials to students, set up and operated audiovisual equipment as requested, assisted with grading examinations, and held office hours and review sessions.
Graduate research assistants provide support to faculty supervisors in the conduct of
research projects. As a research assistant, xxx surveyed scientific papers related to the
research topics, performed numerical simulations, analyzed results, and assisted his faculty research advisor in the preparation of journal articles and conference posters.
Graduate Fellowships are awarded to provide living expenses while the student is
pursuing a graduate-level degree. No specific services or work are required by the fellowship award, although satisfactory academic progress toward completion of the degree must be maintained.
The teaching and research assistantships are nominally considered to be 36% of full time
effort positions. The remaining 64% is reserved for the student’s own academic coursework and research work. Graduate students are considered to be primarily students and only secondarily part-time employees while on assistantships and non-employees while on fellowships.

 

[dfbb]

I updated my letters twice. the last time, I added "assist professors in teaching and research activities"

 

[tahhiir]

Congrats! I noticed that your timeline wasn't added to the spreadsheet, so I scanned your last posts to get the info, would you please post the missing ones?
I have a question too, if you don't mind! Do you think they accepted your TA/RA that you added later?
Thanks!

Thanks N_O,

I am not sure that they accepted my TA/RA.. However, I have proactively sent TA/RA and my bank history of more than six months.
Nationality: Pakistan
No. of applicants: 2

 

[beh467]

Thanks for your comments. But as I mentioned a friend of mine got rejected and they did not account his work experience that occur between application and assessment by that stupid reason of "experience gained in the 10 years preceding the date of the application would be account"!. Anyone else has any comment about NOCs for engineering and how it is possible to simultaneously fulfill all the main duties and lead statement?

How is your appeal going?