Plissken

It's possible they start reviewing applications (and sending out decisions) before the final deadline. Did you check to see when last year's decisions began to be sent out?

I'm in the same boat. Have seen a lot of interview invites and a few admits in the results page, but I've heard nothing yet from any of the schools I applied to.

Berkeley and MIT also have some excellent robotics work going on.

If you're still looking, you might want to take a look at some of the work being done by ME professors at Purdue's Birck Nanotechnology Center. https://nanohub.org/groups/bnc

Without any background in chemistry, engineering, physics, or higher level math (aside from the handful of courses you mentioned), I highly doubt any chemical engineering program would even consider your application. Yes, engineering programs will often admit students from other disciplines if they've taken the requisite coursework, and it's not unusual for such students to take a few remedial courses after being admitted to make up any deficiencies, but we're not talking about a couple deficiencies here. We're talking about an entire 4-year degree's worth of courses that you're missing. I think it's a complete waste of time and money to apply in your current situation. You need to take a whole lot of science, math (through differential equations and probably linear algebra), and engineering courses/prerequisites as a non-degree student at a university of your choice before you even think about applying to graduate programs in engineering. You could also do a second bachelor's, but that's usually not advisable.

A switch is certainly possible, but if you have zero STEM coursework, then you'll be wasting your time and money and your chance of being admitted to any engineering program is zero. Remedial coursework at the beginning of a graduate at degree is one thing, but your post makes it sound like you'd need an entire remedial degree. You need to take a whole lot of math, science, and some basic engineering courses before you even consider applying.

I started reading your post, citrus00, and wondered for a second if I was reading something I myself had written. I graduated with a BS in Molecular & Cell Bio in 2010. Worked for a while in a biology lab, decided I wanted to do something different, settled on mechanical engineering. Took Multivariable Calculus and Differential Equations, then applied for MS programs. My situation is uncommon in that I was admitted to a number of well-ranked programs without ever taking an engineering course. To anyone in a similar boat, I would highly recommend taking as many undergraduate-level engineering prerequisites as possible. Not only will this make you a more realistic candidate for admission to any graduate program, it will require a lot less catching up to peers on your part when you start a program. My first two semesters were incredibly challenging, since I was struggling to learn for the first time things my fellow grad students had already been exposed to in heaps and droves. How is your math background? At the least, you'll want exposure to Multivariable Calc, Differential Equations, and Linear Algebra. Some or all of basic engineering mechanics (statics/dynamics), fluids, thermodynamics, and mechanics of materials will also be invaluable. If you're interested in sensors, then you'll greatly benefit from basic courses in electrical engineering, electronics, and anything that involves programming. It's unlikely (though, I suppose, not impossible) you would be admitted to a PhD program with a BS in biology--I would focus on Master's programs if I were you. The transition from biology to BME is, for the most part, smoother than bio-->ME, so that should give you a leg up. And it's certainly smoother than adamechanical's English/French-->ME! That's a hell of a switch, and I imagine adamechanical was at a great disadvantage compared to those with STEM Bachelor's degrees.

Seconding both of these. As a general rule of thumb: if you have to ask, don't do it. The type of person who can successfully pull off humor in a piece of formal writing is rare, and the ones that can do it already know they can do it, know how they will be received and how they will come off. They don't have to ask. If you are not one of those people, leave it out.

Agree with the above comments. This SOP needs a total rewrite. An SOP for a biology graduate program is not a place to brainstorm or wax philosophic on the job market or your career prospects. It's a piece of writing that should be focused, clear, and concise. State your strengths, briefly address your weaknesses, then sharply and clearly discuss your specific research interests. And don't talk about what other graduate students have or don't have--talk about what you have.

Undergraduate research is more about the experience than the specific content/focus/topic, as far as most graduate programs are concerned. It's more about learning how the research process works, and the transferrable knowledge/skills acquired from participating in it, than anything else.

Liquor and a nice workout at the gym. Not at the same time. A long sit in the park, or a hike in the woods, or writing about it also help.

Hello Alicia, here are some suggestions for your updated draft. I've underlined things I've added or changed, and struckthrough things I believe should be cut. My own comments are in [blue]. Some of the changes are grammatical in nature, and some are just stylistic suggestions, but most are areas where I think you could cut words or tighten up sentences and paragraphs to make them more impactful. Generally speaking, it's best to avoid adverbs as they don't add substance to the writing and instead just fluff it up.

Hello KevAquarius! I received my BS in cell/molecular biology. Worked at a government lab afterward as a glorified lab tech for a while. Decided I didn't want to pursue biology or medicine as a career. Did a lot of soul searching and settled on mechanical engineering. Took multivariable calculus and differential equations, applied to a number of mechanical engineering MS programs, and am currently doing a thesis Masters in ME at a well-ranked program. You can look through my previous posts if you want to read about all the gory details. So it is absolutely possible, and I know many people who have gone from a BS in science or math to graduate programs in engineering. That said, it's likely you'd have to take a number of prerequisites for most programs--my case is an unusual one in that I didn't. At the very least, you must have a good foundation in linear algebra and calculus through multivariable and differential equations as far as math goes. Statistics can also help, but only tangentially. Be sure to email the department at any programs you're thinking of applying to and ask if they'll even consider your application, and what prereqs or remedial coursework you'll have to take before or after being admitted. Like starofdawn said, a non-engineering BS will work against you, and many programs will not consider such applicants (though a large number do, including top schools). I am certainly in the minority at my program--save for 3 or 4 people, almost everyone in my cohort of 60 or 70 has an engineering Bachelors. So my recommendation would be to transfer and get an engineering BS--this will not only allow you to sit for the FE/PE exams, it'll be a major plus if you choose to later apply for graduate programs in engineering.

I was in a similar boat. BS in molecular/cell biology, a couple years research experience and publications in the biomedical industry, no exposure to programming or anything related to engineering except two semesters of calculus, two semesters of calc-based physics, general chemistry (which touches on a lot of topics from thermodynamics), and I'm guessing my two semesters of statistics didn't hurt. A couple years after graduating and being lost, I finally decided I wanted to get into mechanical engineering to work in biomechanics/human-inspired robotics/assistive devices/dynamics of locomotion/mechatronics. I took multivariable calculus and differential equations, did well on the GRE, was accepted to several well-ranked ME Masters programs, and am currently attending one of those. Assuming the rest of your application is stellar, I think it's absolutely possible for you to get into a solid BME program. However, you will almost certainly have to take differential equations and multivariable calculus--linear algebra wouldn't hurt either--before anybody will seriously consider your application; many programs may require additional remedial coursework. Moreover, although it will vary from program to program and faculty member to faculty member, I think it's very unlikely you will get into a PhD program without any experience in engineering. An MS may be a necessary stepping stone. Look for research-based MS programs, as these will make for a natural transition to a PhD program. To answer your final question, yes, you will be out of your depth at first unless you take a lot of basic engineering courses and get a solid amount of coding experience before enrolling. I'm in my second year and still feel overwhelmed at times, and though the learning curve was incredibly steep, I'd say I've caught up reasonably well. Not quite caught up to my peers, but getting there.

I was in this same position last year. I did my undergrad degree in molecular biology at a good (but not great) state school, then after several years decided I wanted to go into a totally different field: mechanical engineering. I applied and was accepted to several top Master's programs. Naturally, since I'd had almost no real exposure to engineering coursework, I found a bunch of textbooks at the library, and bought some review books, and used a number of internet resources to try and prepare. It definitely helped, but not as much as I'd thought it would. I suppose that was to be expected. Either way, I guess it helped enough to see me through my first semester successfully and into the current semester.

I am only a lowly thesis Masters student, but no. A lot of the (first, second, third, fourth, fifth)-year PhD students I'm friends with often prioritize their work over going out on Friday and Saturday nights. Not always, but often enough. Most of the time, it's not because they cannot; it's because they choose not to. I sincerely doubt that anybody is so busy that they cannot go out on Friday and Saturday nights. Maybe on rare occasions, say before their prelims or before their defense, I can understand if they say they are too busy to go out. But the vast majority of the time, it's a matter of time management and prioritization. I'm not talking about people with children and families. I'm talking about students without children/families/other obligatory commitments. Unless you are spending literally every waking hour doing work, you can almost certainly afford to spare a few hours one or two or even three nights a week. I doubt that, on average, the typical grad student's schedule is so busy that they cannot, if they manage their time well, block out 240 minutes once or twice a week to go out or hang out and not do work. The list of jobs that require one to be working almost constantly is very short, and includes individuals such as soldiers and doctors during their residency. Yes, grad students do experience crunch periods when they become very busy, but most of the time it's a matter of time management and proper prioritization. This is not necessarily meant to be a criticism, and it's not meant to suggest I'm perfect. But when most of my friends say they "can't" go out, what it really means is they "choose" not to go out, based on choices they've made throughout the day or week.

I find it considerably more difficult to get people to go out and do things in grad school.

Haha, fun song and video. Nice

I don't know if I'd call it "narcissism." I mean, to be sure, there are certainly narcissists in academia, and I've met my fair share of researchers who are full of themselves, but for the most part I would say it's more that they're really passionate about their work and love to talk about it. Although I didn't have any formal interviews (I'm a thesis Master's student, not PhD), I did have several less formal interviews before being admitted. I'd tried to familiarize myself with their work before speaking to them, but found that they didn't expect me to know much; rather, they enjoyed speaking at length about their various projects and interests.

It bothers me when potential applicants ask about their chances at "Ivy League schools." There's this nagging misconception that "Ivy" means "best," and while the Ivies are certainly great schools, there are also plenty of other great schools. Yet for some reason, it persists. But what really baffles me is graduate level applicants who are dead set on attending "Ivy schools"--not one school in particular which is strong in their particular field of interest and also happens to be an Ivy, but "Ivy schools" in general. At the graduate level, there is more than enough variation between schools and departments at schools (and specific faculty at schools) that the "Ivy" designation really means nothing.

Assuming the original post and poster are indeed genuine: Mathematical, you are the type of person I'd love to meet and befriend. I have never been in the military, and I have never feared for my life, and I have never fought for my life, and I have never lost friends or comrades to violent and unfortunate circumstances. But I frequently think about what stress means. My relatively tame life experience has led me to the conclusions that stress is not disagreeing with your advisor, or your boss, stress is not an exam or a grade (because what is a grade but a number on a piece of paper?). Stress is when you don't know where your next meal is coming from, not knowing whether your loved ones will survive the night, not knowing whether you or you friends will wake up in the morning. Sometimes, I think these thoughts are luxuries resulting from a privileged upbringing--a way of justifying my place and worldview in a world where so many have suffered and/or suffer yet I haven't. I don't deny that. But I digress. You will continue to find these people in graduate school. In my (admittedly limited) experience: academia is a big bubble, disconnected in many ways from the real world. This doesn't mean nobody in academia is in touch with reality. You will always find people, in any arena--including academia--who have a solid grasp on reality, a good perspective. But like any other area, most of them will be caught up in exactly what you describe. I don't think you can ever escape it in first-world, civilian life. Ultimately, I don't think you should base your decision to attend graduate school or not on something like this. You will inevitably be surrounded by people fitting your description, no matter what you choose to do. If you think you can rise above it, ignore it, or perhaps even benefit from it and encourage the others around you to see things the way you do, then I think you should go for it. Consider the long term, not the short-term. If graduate school will help you achieve your long-term goals, then don't worry about the people and attitudes along the way; at worst, you will encounter exactly what you have described. At best, you will meet the exceptions while also making progress toward your overarching professional and academic goals, and making connections that could prove important in your future.

I don't know much about computer or cognitive sciences, but I do know a few things about writing essays, and would be glad to critique your SOP.